Karl Jakob Weiss

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 relaxation time mapping is an established technique primarily used to identify diffuse interstitial fibrosis and oedema. The myocardial extracellular volume (ECV) can be calculated from pre- and post-contrast T1 relaxation times and is a reproducible parametric index of the proportion of volume occupied by non-cardiomyocyte components in myocardial tissue. The conventional calculation of the ECV requires blood sampling to measure the haematocrit (HCT). Given the high variability of the HCT, the blood collection is recommended within 24 h of the CMR scan, limiting its applicability and posing a barrier to the clinical routine use of ECV measurements. In recent years, several research groups have proposed a method to determine the ECV by CMR without blood sampling. This is based on the inverse relationship between the T1 relaxation rate (R1) of blood and the HCT. Consequently, a ‘synthetic’ HCT could be estimated from the native blood R1, avoiding blood sampling. We performed a review and meta-analysis of published studies on synthetic ECV, as well as a secondary analysis of previously published data to examine the effect of the chosen regression modell on bias. While, overall, a good correlation and little bias between synthetic and conventional ECV were found in these studies, questions regarding its accuracy remain. Synthetic HCT and ECV can provide a ‘non-invasive’ quantitative measurement of the myocardium’s extracellular space when timely HCT measurements are not available and large alterations in ECV are expected, such as in cardiac amyloidosis. Due to the dependency of T1 relaxation times on the local setup, calculation of local formulas using linear regression is recommended, which can be easily performed using available data. For the establishment of a local model, ∼500 patients with measured haematocrit (HCT) and left ventricular T1 relaxation rate (R1 = 1/T1) should be available and split evenly into derivation and validation data sets. The regression parameters from the derivation data is used for the estimation of synthetic HCT, which is then used for the calculation of the synthetic extracellular volume (ECV) instead of the measured HCT.

Background: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging with gadolinium-based contrast agents offers unique non-invasive insights into cardiac tissue composition. Myocardial extracellular volume (ECV) has evolved as an objective and robust parameter with broad diagnostic and prognostic implications. For the gadolinium compound gadobutrol, the recommended dose for cardiac imaging, including ECV measurements, is 0.1 mmol/kg (single dose). This dose was optimized for late enhancement imaging, a measure of focal fibrosis. Whether a lower dose is sufficient for ECV measurements is unknown. We aim to evaluate the accuracy of ECV measurements using a half dose of 0.05 mmol/kg gadobutrol compared to the standard single dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. Methods and results: From a contemporary trial (NCT04747366, registered 10 February 2021), a total of 25 examinations with available T1 mapping before and after 0.05 and 0.1 mmol/kg gadobutrol were analyzed. ECV values were calculated automatically from pre- and post-contrast T1 relaxation times. T1 and ECV Measurements were performed in the midventricular septum. ECV values after 0.05 and 0.1 mmol/kg gadobutrol were correlated (R² = 0.920, p < 0.001). ECV values after 0.05 mmol/kg had a bias of +0.9% (95%-CI [0.4; 1.4], p = 0.002) compared to 0.1 mmol/kg gadobutrol, with limits of agreement from −1.5 to 3.3%. Conclusions: CMR with a half dose of 0.05 mmol/kg gadobutrol overestimated ECV by 0.9% compared with a full dose of 0.1 mmol/kg, necessitating adjustment of normal values when using half-dose ECV imaging.

Cardiac involvement has been described in varying proportions of patients recovered from COVID-19 and proposed as a potential cause of prolonged symptoms, often described as post-COVID or long COVID syndrome. Recently, cardiac complications have been reported from COVID-19 vaccines as well. We aimed to compare CMR-findings in patients with clinical cardiac symptoms after COVID-19 and after vaccination. From May 2020 to May 2021, we included 104 patients with suspected cardiac involvement after COVID-19 who received a clinically indicated cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) examination at a high-volume center. The mean time from first positive PCR to CMR was 112 ± 76 days. During their COVID-19 disease, 21% of patients required hospitalization, 17% supplemental oxygen and 7% mechanical ventilation. In 34 (32.7%) of patients, CMR provided a clinically relevant diagnosis: Isolated pericarditis in 10 (9.6%), %), acute myocarditis (both LLC) in 7 (6.7%), possible myocarditis (one LLC) in 5 (4.8%), ischemia in 4 (3.8%), recent infarction in 2 (1.9%), old infarction in 4 (3.8%), dilated cardiomyopathy in 3 (2.9%), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in 2 (1.9%), aortic stenosis, pleural tumor and mitral valve prolapse each in 1 (1.0%). Between May 2021 and August 2021, we examined an additional 27 patients with suspected cardiac disease after COVID-19 vaccination. Of these, CMR provided at least one diagnosis in 22 (81.5%): Isolated pericarditis in 4 (14.8%), acute myocarditis in 9 (33.3%), possible myocarditis (acute or subsided) in 6 (22.2%), ischemia in 3 (37.5% out of 8 patients with stress test), isolated pericardial effusion (> 10 mm) and non-compaction-cardiomyopathy each in 1 (3.7%). The number of myocarditis diagnoses after COVID-19 was highly dependent on the stringency of the myocarditis criteria applied. When including only cases of matching edema and LGE and excluding findings in the right ventricular insertion site, the number of cases dropped from 7 to 2 while the number of cases after COVID-19 vaccination remained unchanged at 9. While myocarditis is an overall rare side effect after COVID-19 vaccination, it is currently the leading cause of myocarditis in our institution due to the large number of vaccinations applied over the last months. Contrary to myocarditis after vaccination, LGE and edema in myocarditis after COVID-19 often did not match or were confined to the RV-insertion site. Whether these cases truly represent myocarditis or a different pathological entity is to be determined in further studies.

Background: The calculation of extracellular volume (ECV) in cardiac magnetic resonance requires hematocrit, limiting its applicability in clinical practice. Based on the linear relationship between hematocrit and blood T1 relaxivity, a synthetic ECV could be estimated without a blood sample. We aim to develop and test regression models for synthetic ECV without blood sampling in 1.5-T and 3.0-T scanners. Methods: A total of 1101 subjects who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance scanning with native and postcontrast T1 mapping and venous hematocrit within 24 hours were retrospectively enrolled. Subjects were randomly split into derivation (n=550) and validation (n=551) subgroups for each scanner. Different regression models were derived controlling for sex, field strength, and left ventricle/right ventricle blood pool and validated in the validation group. We performed additional validation analyses in subgroups of patients with histological validation (n=17), amyloidosis (n=29), anemia (n=185), and reduced ejection fraction (n=322). Results: In the derivation group, 8 specific models and 2 common estimate models were derived. In the validation group, using specific models, synthetic ECV had high agreement with conventional ECV (R ² , 0.87; P 2 , 0.88, P 2 , 0.88; P 2 , 0.89, P <0.0001; −0.21% and −0.18%, left ventricle and right ventricle model, respectively). Histological validation demonstrated equal performance of synthetic and measured ECV. Synthetic ECV as calculated by the common model showed a bias in the anemia cohort significantly reduced by the specific model (−2.45 to −1.28, right ventricle common and specific model, respectively). Conclusions: Synthetic ECV provided a promising way to calculate ECV without blood sampling. Specific models could provide the most accurate value, while common models could be more suitable in routine clinical practice because of their simplicity while maintaining adequate accuracy.

Aims Although the prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) is high among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), studies on stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging frequently exclude patients with AF, and its prognostic and diagnostic value in high-risk patients with suspected or known CAD remains unclear. Methods and results In this longitudinal cohort study, we included 164 consecutive patients with AF during vasodilator perfusion CMR. Diagnostic value was evaluated regarding invasive coronary angiography in a subset of patients. We targeted a follow-up of >5 years and used CMR results as stratification, and the primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events [MACE, cardiovascular (CV) death and myocardial infarction (MI)]. Secondary outcomes included late coronary revascularization or stroke and the components of the primary outcome. Of the whole cohort (73.8% male, mean age 72.2 years ± 7.8 SD), 99.4% were successfully scanned (163/164 patients). Median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 3–5], and median 10-year risk for CV events based on SMART risk score was high (24%, IQR 16–32%). Thirty-two patients (19.6%) presented with ischaemia and 52 patients (31.9%) with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). A combination of LGE and inducible ischaemia was present in 20 patients (12.3%). Diagnostic accuracy was 86.2% [confidence interval (CI) 68.3–96.1%]. The median follow-up was 6.6 years (IQR 3.6–7.8). Ischaemia in vasodilator perfusion CMR was significantly associated with the occurrence of MACE [P < 0.01; hazard ratio (HR) 2.65, CI 1.39–5.08], as well as LGE (P = 0.03; 1.74, CI 1.07–3.64) and the combination of both (P < 0.01; HR 2.67, CI 1.59–5.62). After adjustment by age, left ventricular ejection fraction, and the presence of diabetes, ischaemia in vasodilator perfusion CMR remained significantly associated with the occurrence of MACE (2.10, CI 1.08–4.10; P = 0.03). In secondary endpoint analysis, there was a significant association of ischaemia in CMR with CV death (P < 0.05; HR 1.93, CI 0.95–3.9) and MI (P < 0.01; HR 13, CI 1.35–125.4), while no significant association was found regarding the occurrence of revascularization (P = 0.45; HR 1.43, CI 0.57–3.58) or stroke (P = 0.99; HR 0.99, CI 0.21–2.59). Conclusions Vasodilator stress perfusion CMR demonstrated an excellent diagnostic and significant prognostic value at long-term follow-up in high-risk patients with persistent AF and suspected or known CAD.

Objective: COVID-19 is a highly contagious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Preventing in-hospital infections is crucial to protect patients and hospital staff.Methods: At the very beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the German Heart Center initiated obligatory wearing of surgical face masks for patients and employees, SARS-CoV-2 screening for all patients, and symptom-based testing for employees. In addition, access restriction, closure of outpatient departments, and postponing non-urgent procedures were implemented with community-initiated regulations.Results: During the observation period (03/16/2020–04/27/2020), 1,128 SARS-CoV-2 tests were performed in 983 persons (1.1 tests/person; 589 in patients and 394 in hospital employees). Up to 60% of the clinical workforce was tested based on symptoms and risk (62.5% symptoms, 19.3% direct or indirect contact to known COVID-19, 4.5% returnee from risk area, 13.7% without specific reason). Patient testing for SARS-CoV-2 was obligatory (100% tested). The overall prevalence of positive tests during the observation period was 0.4% (n = 5 out of 1,128 tests performed). The incidence of new infections with SARS-CoV-2 was 0.5% (n = 5 out of 983 individuals; three healthcare workers, two patients). No nosocominal infections occurred, despite a mean number of 14.8 in-hospital contacts.Conclusion: Comprehensive SARS-CoV-2 testing and surgical face masks for patients and hospital staff, in addition to others measures, are key factors for the early detection of COVID-19 and to prevent spreading in the vulnerable hospital population.

Objective: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) is a well-established non-invasive imaging technique for the assessment of peripheral artery disease (PAD). A subtractionless method using modified Dixon (mDixon) fat suppression showed superior image quality at 1.5T over the common subtraction method, using a three-positions stepping table approach with a single dose of contrast agent. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of subtractionless first-pass peripheral MRA at 3T in patients with known or suspected PAD and to compare the performance in terms of vessel-to-background contrast (VBC), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and subjective image quality to conventional subtraction MRA. Methods: Ten patients [mean age 69 years ± 12 standard deviation (SD)] with known or suspected PAD were examined on a clinical 3T scanner (Ingenia, Philips Healthcare, Best, Netherlands) at three table positions using subtractionless and subtraction first-pass peripheral MRA. Two readers rated image quality on a four- point scale. Interobserver agreement was expressed in quadratic weighted κ values. VBC was assessed with a semi-automated process and SNR was compared in a healthy volunteer. Results: Subjective image quality was significantly better with the subtractionless method overall (mean image quality for mDixon imaging: 2.88 ± 0.32 SD vs. for subtraction imaging: 2.57 ± 0.48 SD; P < 0.001) and per table position (abdominal position: 2.88 ± 0.32 vs. 2.57 ± 0.48 SD; P < 0.001); upper leg position: (2.97 ± 0.15 SD vs. 2.68 ± 0.37 SD; P < 0.001; lower leg position: 2.60 ± 0.50 SD vs. 2.13 ± 0.60 SD; P < 0.001). Vessel-to-background contrast increased by 22% with the subtractionless method overall (mean VBC for mDixon imaging: 23.16 ± 8.4 SD vs. for subtraction imaging: 19.00 ± 8.1 SD; factor 1.22, P < 0.001). SNR was 82% higher with the subtractionless method (overall SNR gain 1.82; P < 0.001). Conclusion: This study demonstrated the feasibility and robustness of subtractionless first-pass peripheral MRA at 3T in patients with known or suspected PAD using a three- positions stepping table approach with a single dose of contrast agent. It showed increased image quality compared to the conventional subtraction method and superior performance in terms of SNR and vessel-to-background contrast.