Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
MRI provides superior contrast resolution and multiplanar capabilities, making it the definitive imaging modality for evaluating cardiac masses when initial echocardiography is equivocal.
With its superb contrast resolution, multiplanar imaging capability, and large field of view, magnetic resonance imaging is the gold standard in the imaging evaluation of cardiac and juxtacardiac masses. Spin echo images graphically display the pathoanatomy of intracavitary, valvular, myocardial, pericardial, and juxtacardial masses. Dynamic imaging techniques are used to identify their pathophysiologic consequences on myocardial contraction dynamics, valvular function, or blood flow mechanics. Echocardiography is a good modality to evaluate the heart and in most institutions, remains the initial test in the workup of cardiac masses. However, equivocal echocardiographic studies are common and, in fact, are the leading indication for the use of MR in the workup of cardiac/juxtacardiac masses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Link et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: