Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
Diagnostic utility of fusion 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in cardiac sarcoidosis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Okune Mana, Yasuda Masakazu, Soejima Naoko, Kagioka Yoshinori, Kakehi Kazuyoshi, Kawamura Takayuki, Hanaoka Kohei, Kaida Hayato, Ishii Kazunari, Nakazawa Gaku, Miyazaki Shunichi, Iwanaga Yoshitaka
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although each 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) has been used to diagnose cardiac sarcoidosis (CS), active CS is still misdiagnosed.
METHODS: Active CS, diagnosed by PET alone, was defined as focal or focal on diffuse FDG uptake pattern. In fusion PET/CMR imaging, using a regional analysis with AHA 17-segment model, the patients were categorized into four groups: (1) PET-/LGE-, (2) PET+/LGE-, (3) PET+/LGE+, and (4) PET-/LGE+. PET+/LGE+ was defined as active CS.
RESULTS: 74 Patients with suspected CS were enrolled. Between PET alone and fusion PET/CMR imaging, 20 cases had mismatch evaluations of active CS, and most had diffuse or focal on diffuse FDG uptake pattern on PET alone imaging. 40 Patients fulfilled the 2016 the Japanese Circulation Society diagnostic criteria for CS. The interobserver diagnostic agreement was excellent (κ statistics 0.89) and the overall accuracy for diagnosing CS was 87.8% in fusion PET/CMR imaging, which were superior to those in PET alone imaging (0.57 and 82.4%, respectively). In a sub-analysis of diffuse and focal on diffuse patterns, the agreement (κ statistics 0.86) and overall accuracy (81.8%) in fusion PET/CMR imaging were still better.
CONCLUSIONS: Fusion PET/CMR imaging with regional analysis offered reliable and accurate diagnosis of CS, covering low diagnostic area by FDG-PET alone.
METHODS: Active CS, diagnosed by PET alone, was defined as focal or focal on diffuse FDG uptake pattern. In fusion PET/CMR imaging, using a regional analysis with AHA 17-segment model, the patients were categorized into four groups: (1) PET-/LGE-, (2) PET+/LGE-, (3) PET+/LGE+, and (4) PET-/LGE+. PET+/LGE+ was defined as active CS.
RESULTS: 74 Patients with suspected CS were enrolled. Between PET alone and fusion PET/CMR imaging, 20 cases had mismatch evaluations of active CS, and most had diffuse or focal on diffuse FDG uptake pattern on PET alone imaging. 40 Patients fulfilled the 2016 the Japanese Circulation Society diagnostic criteria for CS. The interobserver diagnostic agreement was excellent (κ statistics 0.89) and the overall accuracy for diagnosing CS was 87.8% in fusion PET/CMR imaging, which were superior to those in PET alone imaging (0.57 and 82.4%, respectively). In a sub-analysis of diffuse and focal on diffuse patterns, the agreement (κ statistics 0.86) and overall accuracy (81.8%) in fusion PET/CMR imaging were still better.
CONCLUSIONS: Fusion PET/CMR imaging with regional analysis offered reliable and accurate diagnosis of CS, covering low diagnostic area by FDG-PET alone.