4.7 Article

Evaluation of the accuracy of gadolinium-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 10, Pages 1683-1690

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.01.047

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES This study analyzed the accuracy of gadolinium-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) for the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis (CS). BACKGROUND The diagnosis of CS was made according to the guidelines of the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare (1993); CMR has not been incorporated into the guidelines, and the diagnostic accuracy of CMR for the diagnosis of CS has not yet been evaluated. METHODS We performed an analysis of 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs), 24-h ambulatory ECGs, echocardiograms, thallium scintigrams, and gadolinium-enhanced CMR studies in 58 biopsy-proven pulmonary sarcoidosis patients assessed for CS. The diagnostic accuracy of CMR for CS was determined using modified Japanese guidelines as the gold standard. RESULTS The diagnosis of CS was made in 12 of 58 patients (21%); CMR revealed late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), mostly involving basal and lateral segments (73%), in 19 patients. In 8 of the 19 patients, scintigraphy was normal, while patchy LGE was present. The sensitivity and specificity of CMR were 100% (95% confidence interval, 78% to 100%) and 78% (95% confidence interval, 64% to 89%), and the positive and negative predictive values were 55% and 100%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 83%. CONCLUSIONS In patients with sarcoidosis, CMR is a useful diagnostic tool to determine cardiac involvement. New diagnostic guidelines should include CMR. (c) 2005 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available