Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:37:39.804Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging predicts cardiac catheter findings for great artery stenosis in children with congenital cardiac disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2011

Nilesh Oswal ,
Ian Sullivan ,
Sachin Khambadkone ,
Andrew M. Taylor  and
Marina L. Hughes
Nilesh Oswal
Affiliation:
Cardiology Department, Cardiorespiratory Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
Ian Sullivan
Affiliation:
Cardiology Department, Cardiorespiratory Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
Sachin Khambadkone
Affiliation:
Cardiology Department, Cardiorespiratory Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
Andrew M. Taylor
Affiliation:
Centre for Cardiovascular Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom
Marina L. Hughes*
Affiliation:
Cardiology Department, Cardiorespiratory Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
*
Correspondence to: Dr M. Hughes, DPhil, MRCP, FRACP, Cardiorespiratory Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, Great Ormond Street, London, WC1N 3JH, United Kingdom. Tel: +442074059200, ext 6835; Fax: +44 2078138262; E-mail: HugheM@gosh.nhs.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To assess the cardiac catheterisation findings of all children in whom cardiac magnetic resonance imaging found great artery stenosis.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of all 45 consecutive children with congenital cardiac disease who were undergoing cardiac catheterisation for intervention on cardiac magnetic resonance-defined great vessel stenosis, between January, 2006 and August, 2008.

Results

Following cardiac magnetic resonance, 60 significant great vessel stenoses were identified and referred to cardiac catheterisation for intervention. All patients were catheterised within a median and interquartile range of 84 and 4–149 days, respectively, of cardiac magnetic resonance. At cardiac catheterisation, the children were aged 11.5 years – with an interquartile range of 3.8–16.9 years – and weighed 34 kilograms – with an interquartile range of 15–56 kilograms. Comparing cardiac magnetic resonance and cardiac catheterisation findings, 53 (88%) findings were concordant and seven were discordant. In six of seven (86%) discordant observations, cardiac magnetic resonance defined moderate–severe great vessel stenosis – involving three branch pulmonary arteries and three aortas. This was not confirmed by cardiac catheterisation, which revealed mild stenoses and haemodynamic gradients insufficient for intervention. In one patient, a mild, proximal right pulmonary artery narrowing was found at cardiac catheterisation, which was not mentioned in the cardiac magnetic resonance report. There was no difference between discordant and concordant groups on the basis of patient age, weight, interval between cardiac magnetic resonance and cardiac catheterisation, or type of lesion.

Conclusion

Invasive assessment confirmed cardiac magnetic resonance-diagnosed great vessel stenosis in the majority of this cohort. The predominant discordant finding was lower catherisation gradient than predicted by morphologic and functional cardiac magnetic resonance assessment. Flow volume diversion – for example, unilateral pulmonary artery stenosis – and anaesthetic effects may account for some differences. Prospective refinement of cardiac magnetic resonance and interventional data may further improve the validity of non-invasive imaging thresholds for intervention.

Keywords

Cardiac catheterisationdiagnostic imaginginterventional catheterisation
Type
Original Articles
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , 02 March 2012 , pp. 178 - 183
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Puranik, R, Muthurangu, V, Celermajer, DS, Taylor, AM. Congenital heart disease and multi-modality imaging. Heart Lung Circ 2010; 19: 133–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Muthurangu, V, Taylor, AM, Hegde, SR, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging after stage I Norwood operation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Circulation 2005; 112: 3256–3263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Brown, DW, Gauvreau, K, Powell, AJ, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance versus routine cardiac catheterization before bidirectional glenn anastomosis in infants with functional single ventricle: a prospective randomized trial. Circulation 2007; 116: 2718–2725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Kappetein, PA, Guit, GL, Bogers, AJ, et al. Noninvasive long-term follow-up after coarctation repair. Ann Thorac Surg 1993; 55: 1153–1159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Ro, PS, Rychik, J, Cohen, MS, Mahle, WT, Rome, JJ. Diagnostic assessment before Fontan operation in patients with bidirectional cavopulmonary anastomosis: are noninvasive methods sufficient? J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 184–187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Muthurangu, V, Taylor, AM, Hegde, SR, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging after stage I Norwood operation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Circulation 2005; 112: 3256–3263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Nielsen, JC, Powell, AJ, Gauvreau, K, Marcus, EN, Prakash, A, Geva, T. Magnetic resonance imaging predictors of coarctation severity. Circulation 2005; 111: 622–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Oshinski, JN, Parks, WJ, Markou, CP, et al. Improved measurement of pressure gradients in aortic coarctation by magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996; 28: 1818–1826.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Tsai-Goodman, B, Geva, T, Odegard, KC, Sena, LM, Powell, AJ. Clinical role, accuracy, and technical aspects of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in infants. Am J Cardiol 2004; 94: 69–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed