Why the study?
Does magnetic resonance imaging accurately diagnose constrictive pericarditis compared to surgical exploration in patients with clinical and echocardiographic suspicion?
Does magnetic resonance imaging accurately diagnose constrictive pericarditis compared to surgical exploration in patients with clinical and echocardiographic suspicion?
Magnetic resonance imaging accurately identifies pericardial thickening and its topography in patients with suspected constrictive pericarditis, with findings perfectly concordant with surgical exploration.
Supports MRI for suspected constrictive pericarditis; extends concordance data yet leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis continues to be a clinical challenge. Magnetic resonance imaging provides excellent visualization of the pericardium. The aim of our study is to clarify the contribution of this non invasive exploration in the diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis in our center. METHODS: we conducted a prospective study over a period of two years, since 2008, covering a series of patients (n = 11), mean age 44 ± 15 years, in whom constrictive pericarditis was suspected clinically and on transthoracic echocardiography. We studied its characteristics on magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging confirmed the diagnosis showing pericardial thickening in all cases, measuring 8.2 +/- 2.6 mm on average, circumferential in 64%, and localized in 36%. The imaging data, particularly pericardial thickening and its topography, were confirmed by surgical exploration, and results were concordant in all cases. CONCLUSION: Magnetic resonance imaging is a powerful tool to establish constrictive pericarditis diagnosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lachhab et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: