Key result
Multimodality imaging provides complementary diagnostic value for characterizing cardiac masses.
Why the study?
Given the diversity of cardiac masses, there are no guidelines or consensus statements regarding the best diagnostic or therapeutic approach.
Does cardiovascular imaging improve differential diagnosis in patients with cardiac masses?
Does cardiovascular imaging improve differential diagnosis in patients with cardiac masses?
Multimodality cardiovascular imaging is essential for the accurate differential diagnosis, characterization, and management planning of cardiac masses.
May aid differential diagnosis of cardiac masses via complementary imaging; extends autopsy data but leaves open prospective validation of proposed algorithms.
Cardiac masses are space occupying lesions within the cardiac cavities or adjacent to the pericardium. They include frequently diagnosed clinical entities such as clots and vegetations, common benign tumors such as myxomas and papillary fibroelastomas and uncommon benign or malignant primary or metastatic tumors. Given their diversity, there are no guidelines or consensus statements regarding the best diagnostic or therapeutic approach. In the past, diagnosis used to be made by the histological specimens after surgery or during the post-mortem examination. Nevertheless, evolution and increased availability of cardiovascular imaging modalities has enabled better characterization of the masses and the surrounding tissue. Transthoracic echocardiography using contrast agents can evaluate the location, the morphology and the perfusion of the mass as well as its hemodynamic effect. Transesophageal echocardiography has increased spatial and temporal resolution; hence it is superior in depicting small highly mobile masses. Cardiac magnetic resonance and cardiac computed tomography are complementary providing tissue characterization. The scope of this review is to present the role of cardiovascular imaging in the differential diagnosis of cardiac masses and to propose a step-wise diagnostic algorithm, taking into account the epidemiology and clinical presentation of the cardiac masses, as well as the availability and the incremental value of each imaging modality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aggeli et al. (2020) conducted a review in Cardiac masses. Cardiovascular imaging (TTE, TEE, CMR, CT, PET) was evaluated. Cardiovascular imaging modalities, including echocardiography, CMR, CT, and PET, provide complementary information for the differential diagnosis and characterization of cardiac masses.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: