Key result
Magneto-fluorescent nanoparticle CMR provided better image contrast compared with conventional CMR (CNR change 46% vs 8%, P<0.001) for detecting myocardial inflammation in a rat model.
Why the study?
Does cardiovascular magnetic resonance with magneto-fluorescent nanoparticles improve the detection and grading of myocardial inflammation compared to conventional CMR in a rat model of experimental autoimmune myocarditis?
Does cardiovascular magnetic resonance with magneto-fluorescent nanoparticles improve the detection and grading of myocardial inflammation compared to conventional CMR in a rat model of experimental autoimmune myocarditis?
Absolute Event Rate: 46% vs 8%
p-value: p=<0.001
Magneto-fluorescent nanoparticle CMR provides superior noninvasive visualization and grading of myocardial inflammation compared to conventional CMR in a preclinical model of myocarditis.
May improve preclinical myocarditis imaging; leaves open clinical translation and validation.
BACKGROUND: Limited availability of noninvasive and biologically precise diagnostic tools poses a challenge for the evaluation and management of patients with myocarditis. METHODS AND RESULTS: The feasibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging with magneto-fluorescent nanoparticles (MNPs) for detection of myocarditis and its effectiveness in discriminating inflammation grades were assessed in experimental autoimmune myocarditis (EAM) (n=65) and control (n=10) rats. After undergoing CMR, rats were administered with MNPs, followed by a second CMR 24 hours later. Head-to-head comparison of MNP-CMR with T(2)-weighted, early and late gadolinium enhancement CMR was performed in additional EAM (n=10) and control (n=5) rats. Contrast-to-noise ratios were measured and compared between groups. Flow cytometry and microscopy demonstrated that infiltrating inflammatory cells engulfed MNPs, resulting in altered myocardial T(2)* effect. Changes in contrast-to-noise ratio between pre- and post-MNP CMR were significantly greater in EAM rats (1.08 ± 0.10 versus 0.48 ± 0.20; P<0.001). In addition, contrast-to-noise ratio measurement in MNP-CMR clearly detected the extent of inflammation (P<0.001) except for mild inflammation. Compared with conventional CMR, MNP-CMR provided better image contrast (CNR change 8% versus 46%, P<0.001) and detectability of focal myocardial inflammation. Notably, MNP-CMR successfully tracked the evolution of myocardial inflammation in the same EAM rats. CONCLUSIONS: Magneto-fluorescent nanoparticle CMR permitted effective visualization of myocardial inflammatory cellular infiltrates and distinction of the extent of inflammation compared with conventional CMR in a preclinical model of EAM. Magneto-fluorescent nanoparticle CMR performs best in EAM rats with at least moderate inflammatory response.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moon et al. (2012) studied Experimental autoimmune myocarditis (n=90). Magneto-fluorescent nanoparticle CMR vs. Conventional CMR was evaluated on Image contrast (CNR change) (p=<0.001). Magneto-fluorescent nanoparticle CMR provided better image contrast compared with conventional CMR (CNR change 46% vs 8%, P<0.001) for detecting myocardial inflammation in a rat model.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: