4.6 Review

CMR in Evaluating Valvular Heart Disease Diagnosis, Severity, and Outcomes

Journal

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING
Volume 14, Issue 10, Pages 2020-2032

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.09.029

Keywords

cardiac magnetic resonance; flow quantification; valve disease

Funding

  1. United Kingdom Na-tional Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a versatile imaging tool that provides comprehensive assessment of valvular heart disease, accurately evaluating all four heart valves, independently assessing each valve lesion, and possessing the ability to predict future clinical outcomes.
Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a versatile imaging tool that brings much to the assessment of valvular heart disease. Although it is best known for myocardial imaging (even in valve disease), it provides excellent assessment of all 4 heart valves, with some distinct advantages, including a free choice of image planes and accurate flow and volumetric quantification. These allow the severity of each valve lesion to be characterized, in addition to optimal visualization of the surrounding outflow tracts and vessels, to deliver a comprehensive package. It can assess each valve lesion separately (in multiple valve disease) and is not affected by hemodynamic status. The accurate quantitation of regurgitant lesions and the ability to characterize myocardial changes also provides an ability to predict future clinical outcomes in asymptomatic patients. This review outlines how CMR can be used in cardiac valve disease to compliment echocardiography and enhance the patient assessment. It covers the main CMR methods used, their strengths and limitations, and the optimal way to apply them to evaluate valve disease. (J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2021;14:2020-2032) (c) 2021 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available