Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA; Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA; Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2024 Feb;17(2):128-145. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2023.05.007. Epub 2023 Jul 5.
Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) differentiates cardiac metastasis (C) and cardiac thrombus (C) based on tissue characteristics stemming from vascularity on late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). Perfusion CMR can assess magnitude of vascularity; utility for cardiac masses (C) is unknown.
This study sought to determine if perfusion CMR provides diagnostic and prognostic utility for C beyond binary differentiation of C and C.
The population comprised adult cancer patients with C on CMR; C and C were defined using LGE-CMR: C+ patients were matched to C- control subjects for cancer type/stage. First-pass perfusion CMR was interpreted visually and semiquantitatively for C vascularity, including contrast enhancement ratio (CER) (plateau vs baseline) and contrast uptake rate (CUR) (slope). Follow-up was performed for all-cause mortality.
A total of 462 cancer patients were studied, including patients with (C = 173, C = 69) and without C on LGE-CMR. On perfusion CMR, CER and CUR were higher within C vs C (P < 0.001); CUR yielded better performance (AUC: 0.89-0.93) than CER (AUC: 0.66-0.72) (both P < 0.001) to differentiate LGE-CMR-evidenced C and C, although both CUR (P = 0.10) and CER (P = 0.01) typically misclassified C with minimal enhancement. During follow-up, mortality among C patients was high but variable; 47% of patients were alive 1 year post-CMR. Patients with semiquantitative perfusion CMR-evidenced C had higher mortality than control subjects (HR: 1.42 [95% CI: 1.06-1.90]; P = 0.02), paralleling visual perfusion CMR (HR: 1.47 [95% CI: 1.12-1.94]; P = 0.006) and LGE-CMR (HR: 1.52 [95% CI: 1.16-2.00]; P = 0.003). Among patients with C on LGE-CMR, mortality was highest among patients (P = 0.002) with lesions in the bottom perfusion (CER) tertile, corresponding to low vascularity. Among C and cancer-matched control subjects, mortality was equivalent (P = NS) among patients with lesions in the upper CER tertile (corresponding to higher lesion vascularity). Conversely, patients with C in the middle (P = 0.03) and lowest (lowest vascularity) (P = 0.001) CER tertiles had increased mortality.
Perfusion CMR yields prognostic utility that complements LGE-CMR: Among cancer patients with LGE-CMR defined C, mortality increases in proportion to magnitude of lesion hypoperfusion.
心脏磁共振(CMR)基于晚期钆增强(LGE)时源自血管生成的组织特征来区分心脏转移瘤(C)和心脏血栓(C)。灌注 CMR 可以评估血管生成的程度;其在心脏肿块(C)中的应用尚不清楚。
本研究旨在确定灌注 CMR 是否能为 C 提供诊断和预后效用,超出 C 和 C 的二元区分。
该人群包括 CMR 上有 C 的成年癌症患者;C 和 C 是通过 LGE-CMR 定义的:C+患者与 C-对照组按癌症类型/分期进行匹配。首先对灌注 CMR 进行视觉和半定量解读,以评估 C 的血管生成,包括对比增强比(CER)(平台期与基线期)和对比摄取率(CUR)(斜率)。对所有原因的死亡率进行随访。
共研究了 462 名癌症患者,包括有(C=173,C=69)和没有 LGE-CMR 证据的 C 的患者。在灌注 CMR 上,C 中的 CER 和 CUR 均高于 C(P<0.001);CUR 在区分 LGE-CMR 证实的 C 和 C 方面优于 CER(AUC:0.89-0.93)优于 CER(AUC:0.66-0.72)(均 P<0.001),尽管 CUR(P=0.10)和 CER(P=0.01)通常都会错误分类轻度增强的 C。在随访期间,C 患者的死亡率很高但变化不定;47%的患者在 CMR 后 1 年仍存活。在半定量灌注 CMR 有 C 证据的患者中,死亡率高于对照组(HR:1.42[95%CI:1.06-1.90];P=0.02),与视觉灌注 CMR(HR:1.47[95%CI:1.12-1.94];P=0.006)和 LGE-CMR(HR:1.52[95%CI:1.16-2.00];P=0.003)一致。在 LGE-CMR 上有 C 的患者中,死亡率在 CER 最低三分位数的患者中最高(P=0.002),对应低血管生成。在 C 和癌症匹配的对照组中,CER 最高三分位数(对应更高的病变血管生成)的患者死亡率相当(P=NS)。相反,在 CER 中值(P=0.03)和最低(最低血管生成)(P=0.001)三分位数的患者中,死亡率增加。
灌注 CMR 提供了补充 LGE-CMR 的预后效用:在 LGE-CMR 定义的有 C 的癌症患者中,死亡率随病变低灌注程度的增加而增加。