Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

The diagnostic performance of imaging methods in ARVC using the 2010 Task Force criteria

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

DOI

  1. Fascicular heart blocks and risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes: results from a large primary care population

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Coagulation parameters in the newborn and infant - the Copenhagen Baby Heart and COMPARE studies

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Lipoprotein(a) levels at birth and in early childhood: The COMPARE Study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Ticagrelor and the risk of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia and other infections

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  5. Lung Ultrasound Findings Associated With COVID-19 ARDS, ICU Admission, and All-Cause Mortality

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

AIMS: This study evaluates the agreement between echocardiographic and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging data, and the impact a discrepancy between the two may have on the clinical diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC).

METHODS AND RESULTS: From the Nordic ARVC Registry, 102 patients with definite ARVC who had undergone both echocardiography and CMR were included (median age 42 ± 16 years, 36% female, 78% probands). Patients were divided into two groups according to CMR-positive or -negative criteria, and the echocardiographic data were compared between the two. There were 72 CMR-positive patients. They had significantly larger RV dimensions and lower fractional area change on echocardiography compared with CMR-negative patients; parasternal long-axis right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) 37 ± 7 vs. 32 ± 5 mm, parasternal short-axis RVOT 38 ± 7 vs. 32 ± 6 mm, fractional area shortening 31 ± 9 vs. 39 ± 9% (P < 0.003 for all). Only 36 (50%) of the CMR-positive patients fulfilled ARVC criteria by echocardiography, hence the diagnostic performance was low; sensitivity 50% and specificity 70%, positive predictive value 80% and negative predictive value 37%. Individuals with regional wall abnormalities on CMR were more likely to have ventricular arrhythmias (77 vs. 57%, P = 0.047).

CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with imaging-positive ARVC by CMR did not fulfil echocardiographic ARVC 2010 criteria. These findings confirm that echocardiographic evaluation of subtle structural changes in the right ventricle may be unreliable, and the diagnostic performance of CMR compared with echocardiography should be reflected in the guidelines.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean heart journal cardiovascular Imaging
Volume15
Issue number11
Pages (from-to)1219-25
Number of pages7
ISSN1525-2167
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2014

ID: 44677786