1. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Patients with Cardiac Electronic Devices: Evidence from a Multicenter Study
- Author
-
Barison, A, Ricci, F, Pavon, A, Muscogiuri, G, Bisaccia, G, Camastra, G, De Lazzari, M, Lanzillo, C, Raguso, M, Monti, L, Vargiu, S, Pedrotti, P, Piacenti, M, Todiere, G, Pontone, G, Indolfi, C, Dellegrottaglie, S, Lombardi, M, Schwitter, J, Aquaro, G, Barison A., Ricci F., Pavon A. G., Muscogiuri G., Bisaccia G., Camastra G., De Lazzari M., Lanzillo C., Raguso M., Monti L., Vargiu S., Pedrotti P., Piacenti M., Todiere G., Pontone G., Indolfi C., Dellegrottaglie S., Lombardi M., Schwitter J., Aquaro G. D., Barison, A, Ricci, F, Pavon, A, Muscogiuri, G, Bisaccia, G, Camastra, G, De Lazzari, M, Lanzillo, C, Raguso, M, Monti, L, Vargiu, S, Pedrotti, P, Piacenti, M, Todiere, G, Pontone, G, Indolfi, C, Dellegrottaglie, S, Lombardi, M, Schwitter, J, Aquaro, G, Barison A., Ricci F., Pavon A. G., Muscogiuri G., Bisaccia G., Camastra G., De Lazzari M., Lanzillo C., Raguso M., Monti L., Vargiu S., Pedrotti P., Piacenti M., Todiere G., Pontone G., Indolfi C., Dellegrottaglie S., Lombardi M., Schwitter J., and Aquaro G. D.
- Abstract
Background: Most recent cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can safely undergo a cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) scan under certain conditions, but metal artifacts may degrade image quality. The aim of this study was to assess the overall diagnostic yield of CMR and the extent of metal artifacts in a multicenter, multivendor study on CIED patients referred for CMR. Methods: We analyzed 309 CMR scans from 292 patients (age 57 ± 16 years, 219 male) with an MR-conditional pacemaker (n = 122), defibrillator (n = 149), or loop recorder (n = 38); CMR scans were performed in 10 centers from 2012 to 2020; MR-unsafe implants were excluded. Clinical and device parameters were recorded before and after the CMR scan. A visual analysis of metal artifacts was performed for each sequence on a segmental basis, based on a 5-point artifact score. Results: The vast majority of CMR scans (n = 255, 83%) were completely performed, while only 32 (10%) were interrupted soon after the first sequences and 22 (7%) were only partly acquired; CMR quality was non-diagnostic in 34 (11%) scans, poor (<1/3 sequences were diagnostic) in 25 (8%), or acceptable (1/3 to 2/3 sequences were diagnostic) in 40 (13%), while most scans (n = 201, 68%) were of overall good quality. No adverse event or device malfunctioning occurred, and only nonsignificant changes in device parameters were recorded. The most affected sequences were SSFP (median score 0.32 [interquartile range 0.07–0.91]), followed by GRE (0.18 [0.02–0.59]) and LGE (0.14 [0.02–0.55]). ICDs induced more artifacts (median score in SSFP images 0.87 [0.50–1.46]) than PMs (0.11 [0.03–0.28]) or ILRs (0.11 [0.00–0.56]). Moreover, most artifacts were located in the anterior, anteroseptal, anterolateral, and apical segments of the LV and in the outflow tract of the RV. Conclusions: CMR is a versatile imaging technique, with a high safety profile and overall good image quality even in patients with MR-conditional CIEDs. Several stra
- Published
- 2023