Meier Claudia, Bietenbeck Michael, Theofanidou Maria, Vehof Volker, Stalling Philipp, Korthals Dennis, Chamling Bishwas, Estepa Misael, Doeblin Patrick, Kelle Sebastian, Yilmaz Ali
Department of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building A1, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Internal Intensive Care Medicine, Medical School and University Medical Center OWL, Hospital Lippe GmbH,, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Clin Res Cardiol. 2025 Apr 14. doi: 10.1007/s00392-025-02636-1.
The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is increasing. However, there is limited experience regarding vasodilator-stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and resulting device artifacts on perfusion images. The aim of this study was to determine CMR image quality in patients with different CIED types for CMR-based perfusion stress testing.
A total of 156 patients with active CIEDs underwent CMR on a 1.5-Tesla scanner. Both conventional steady-state-free-precession (SSFP) and modified spoiled gradient-echo (sGE) protocols under stress and resting conditions were used to evaluate image artifacts in a 16-segment segment model of the heart. The study group comprised 39% conventional pacemaker (PM), 4% cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P), 38% conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), 6% cardiac resynchronization therapy-ICD (CRT-D), and 13% subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) patients. PM-carriers showed only minor image artifacts in both perfusion protocols. Artifacts caused by ICDs were predominantly located in the left-ventricular (LV) inferolateral and anterior segments. S-ICDs showed the highest extent of artifacts with an anterolateral accentuation. The artifact extent was significantly reduced when sGE-based perfusion was used compared to SSFP-based sequences. 69% of the patients received a stress-perfusion protocol, and elective coronary angiography confirmed the presence of coronary stenosis in three cases. No major safety-relevant issues occurred.
Myocardial perfusion imaging by CMR is safe and feasible with moderate-to-high image quality in patients with all types of CIEDs, including non-conditional devices, ICDs, and S-ICDs. A sGE-based perfusion protocol should be preferred in patients with left-sided ICDs, CRT-Ds, or S-ICDs.
植入式心脏电子设备(CIED)患者数量不断增加。然而,关于血管扩张剂负荷心血管磁共振成像(CMR)以及灌注图像上由此产生的设备伪影的经验有限。本研究的目的是确定不同类型CIED患者基于CMR的灌注负荷试验的CMR图像质量。
156例使用CIED的患者在1.5特斯拉扫描仪上接受CMR检查。在负荷和静息状态下,采用传统的稳态自由进动(SSFP)和改良的扰相梯度回波(sGE)序列,在心脏的16节段模型中评估图像伪影。研究组包括39%的传统起搏器(PM)、4%的心脏再同步治疗起搏器(CRT-P)、38%的传统植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)、6%的心脏再同步治疗除颤器(CRT-D)和13%的皮下ICD(S-ICD)患者。PM携带者在两种灌注序列中仅表现出轻微的图像伪影。ICD引起的伪影主要位于左心室(LV)下外侧和前壁节段。S-ICD表现出最高程度的伪影,以前外侧加重为著。与基于SSFP的序列相比,使用基于sGE的灌注时伪影程度显著降低。69%的患者接受了负荷灌注方案,选择性冠状动脉造影证实3例存在冠状动脉狭窄。未发生重大安全相关问题。
CMR心肌灌注成像对所有类型的CIED患者(包括无条件设备、ICD和S-ICD)是安全可行的,图像质量为中度至高度。对于左侧ICD、CRT-D或S-ICD患者,应优先选择基于sGE的灌注方案。