Why the study?
Cardiac imaging is becoming commonplace and increasingly important in large-cohort prospective cardiovascular trials, statements, and guidelines, prompting a summary of key imaging findings relevant to clinical practice from the past year.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review of key articles
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Condenses 2019 CV CT/MRI advances; leaves open prospective validation of AI and MRI prognostic tools.
Cardiac imaging is becoming commonplace throughout radiology practices and is increasingly important in large-cohort prospective cardiovascular trials and in statements and guidelines. In this review, the authors summarize some of the most important imaging findings relevant to clinical practice in the past year. Key coronary CT angiography studies have included rigorous meta-analysis of its diagnostic accuracy, prognostic implications of adverse coronary plaque features, and sex differences. The value of CT for catheter-delivered valve implantation (eg, transcatheter aortic and mitral valve replacements) was further elucidated in large-cohort outcome trials. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy registries have revealed distinct clinical and MRI phenotypes, highlighting different underlying causes, while others clarified the prognostic usefulness of MRI in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and Fabry disease. Artificial intelligence and/or machine learning was applied to many aspects of cardiovascular imaging, while evidence of the benefits of both adenosine stress perfusion cardiac MRI and coronary CT angiography–derived fractional flow reserve from real-world trials has increased. Studies on vaping and vascular endothelial function and the whole-body MRI depiction of metabolic syndrome consequences were also noteworthy. Although this review focuses on Radiology articles, key articles from high-impact clinical journals are also included. Although not possible to detail all articles because of space limitations, the authors attempted to highlight those with the most pragmatic and scientific value.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dodd et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: