Key result
TEE outperforms CT and CMR for detecting papillary fibroelastomas, achieving an ~81% detection rate.
Its licence doesn't allow us to show a copy here.
Why the study?
The diagnostic utility of CT and CMR compared to TEE for detecting cardiac papillary fibroelastomas was not well established in a large pathologically-confirmed cohort.
Does CT or CMR improve the detection of cardiac papillary fibroelastomas compared to TEE in patients with pathologically proven cases?
Observational (n=385)
Does CT or CMR improve the detection of cardiac papillary fibroelastomas compared to TEE in patients with pathologically proven cases?
TEE remains the most sensitive primary imaging modality for detecting cardiac papillary fibroelastomas, while CT and CMR serve as complementary tools when targeted protocols are used.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
TEE may remain first-line for papillary fibroelastoma detection; leaves open incremental value of targeted CT/CMR protocols.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of computed tomography (CT) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging compared to transesophageal echo (TEE) in detecting cardiac papillary fibroelastomas (PFE), using the largest dataset of pathologically-confirmed cases to date, and characterize imaging findings across modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 385 patients with pathologically proven PFEs identified during cardiac surgery from January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2024. We assessed TEE, CT and CMR for lesion detection and imaging characteristics. The study was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB 23-009539). RESULTS: Of 384 patients who underwent TEE, PFEs were detected in 310 (80.7%; 95% CI, 76.5%-84.4%). CMR detected PFEs in 11 of 48 patients (22.9%; 95% CI, 13.0%-36.1%), whereas CT detected PFEs in 39 of 91 patients (42.9%; 95% CI, 33%-53%), predominantly left-sided, especially on the aortic valve. Detection was higher when CT or CMR was performed specifically for cardiac mass evaluation (80.0% and 88.9%, respectively) than for other indications. All CT and CMR-detected PFEs were also seen on TEE. TEE demonstrated the ability to detect very small lesions, including PFEs measuring less than 1 mm. CONCLUSION: TEE remains the primary imaging modality for suspected PFEs. CT and CMR provide complementary information when TEE is contraindicated or inconclusive, but detection varies with study indication, protocol, lesion characteristics, and prior knowledge of lesion location. A targeted multimodality approach may improve diagnostic confidence in selected cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aboukhatwa et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Cardiac papillary fibroelastomas (PFE) (n=385). Computed tomography (CT) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) vs. Transesophageal echo (TEE) was evaluated on Lesion detection. Computed tomography (42.9%) and cardiac magnetic resonance (22.9%) had lower detection rates for pathologically-proven papillary fibroelastomas compared to transesophageal echo (80.7%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: