4.3 Review

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Tissue Characterization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

期刊

JOURNAL OF THORACIC IMAGING
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 2-16

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000621

关键词

ischemic cardiomyopathy; tissue characterization; myocardial viability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tissue characterization with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is valuable for evaluating myocardial abnormalities in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) patients, providing important information for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment planning.
Ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) is one of the most common causes of congestive heart failure. In patients with ICM, tissue characterization with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) allows for evaluation of myocardial abnormalities in acute and chronic settings. Myocardial edema, microvascular obstruction (MVO), intracardiac thrombus, intramyocardial hemorrhage, and late gadolinium enhancement of the myocardium are easily depicted using standard CMR sequences. In the acute setting, tissue characterization is mainly focused on assessment of ventricular thrombus and MVO, which are associated with poor prognosis. Conversely, in chronic ICM, it is important to depict late gadolinium enhancement and myocardial ischemia using stress perfusion sequences. Overall, with CMR's ability to accurately characterize myocardial tissue in acute and chronic ICM, it represents a valuable diagnostic and prognostic imaging method for treatment planning. In particular, tissue characterization abnormalities in the acute setting can provide information regarding the patients that may develop major adverse cardiac event and show the presence of ventricular thrombus; in the chronic setting, evaluation of viable myocardium can be fundamental for planning myocardial revascularization. In this review, the main findings on tissue characterization are illustrated in acute and chronic settings using qualitative and quantitative tissue characterization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据