New observations from MR velocity-encoded flow measurements concerning diastolic function in constrictive pericarditis

Constrictive Pericarditis: An Update on Noninvasive Multimodal Diagnosis

Constrictive pericarditis (CP) is a rare condition that can affect the pericardium after every pericardial disease process and has been described even after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccine. In CP, the affected pericardium, usually the inner layer, is noncompliant, constraining the heart to a fixed maximum volume and impairing the diastolic function. This leads to several clinical features, that, however, can be pleomorphic. In its difficult diagnostic workup, noninvasive multimodal imaging plays a central role, providing important morphological and functional data, like the enhanced ventricular interdependence and the dissociation between intrathoracic and intracardiac pressures. An early and proper diagnosis is crucial to set an appropriate therapy, changing the prognosis of patients affected by CP. In this review, we cover in detail the main elements of each imaging technique, after a reminder of pathophysiology useful for understanding the diagnostic findings.

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques and Applications for Pericardial Diseases

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging plays a central role among multimodality imaging modalities in the assessment, diagnosis, and surveillance of pericardial diseases. Clinicians and imagers should have a foundational understanding of the utilities, advantages, and limitations of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and how they integrate with other diagnostic tools involved in the evaluation and management of pericardial diseases. This review aims to outline the contemporary magnetic resonance imaging sequences used to evaluate the pericardium, followed by exploring the main clinical applications of magnetic resonance imaging for identifying pericardial inflammation, constriction, and effusion.

Systematic review of non-invasive cardiovascular imaging in the diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis

Background

Diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis (CP) can be challenging. It can be nearly impossible to distinguish CP from other causes of right heart failure. Although various imaging modalities help in the diagnosis, no test is definitive. Several reviews have addressed the role of various imaging techniques in the diagnosis of CP but a systematic review has not yet been published.

Objective

Our intention was to study the ability of various non-invasive imaging modalities to diagnose CP in patients with surgically confirmed disease and to apply our findings to develop a clinically useful diagnostic algorithm.

Methods

A PubMed (NLM) search was performed with MeSH term “constrictive pericarditis”. Original articles that investigated the ability of various cardiovascular imaging modalities to noninvasively diagnose surgically confirmed CP were included in our review. Investigations that included any cases without surgical confirmation were excluded.

Results

The PubMed search yielded 3001 results with MeSH term “constrictive pericarditis” (January 8, 2016). We identified (40) studies on CP that matched our inclusion criteria. We summarized our results sorted by individual non-invasive CV imaging modalities – echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Under each imaging modality, we grouped our discussion based on different parameters useful in CP diagnosis.

Conclusions

In conclusion, contemporary diagnosis of CP is based on clinical features and echocardiography. Cardiac MRI is recommended in patients where echocardiography is not diagnostic. Both cardiac MRI and CT can guide surgical planning but we prefer MRI as it provides both structural and functional information.

The relative atrial volume ratio and late gadolinium enhancement provide additive information to differentiate constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

The differentiation of constrictive pericarditis (CP) from restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM) is often difficult. This study sought to determine the clinical utility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) for differentiating both these disorders.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with surgically documented CP, 22 patients with RCM and 25 normal subjects were included in the study. CMR yielded information about cardiac morphology, function and tissue characteristics. The left (LA) and right atrial (RA) volume was calculated using the area-length method. The relative atrial volume ratio (RAR) was defined as the LA volume divided by RA volume. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to test the ability of different variables in differentiating CP from RCM.

RESULTS

The maximal pericardial thickness in CP patients was significantly larger than in normal subjects and RCM patients. The RA volume index in RCM patients (90.5 ± 35.3 mL/m2) was significantly larger than in CP patients (71.4 ± 15.7 mL/m2, p = 0.006) and normal subjects (38.1 ± 9.0 mL/m2, p < 0.001). The LA volume index in RCM (96.0 ± 37.0 mL/m2) and CP patients (105.6 ± 25.1 mL/m2) was significantly larger than in normal subjects (39.5 ± 9.5 mL/m2, p < 0.001 for all). The RAR in CP patients (1.50 ± 0.29) was significantly larger than in RCM patients (1.12 ± 0.33, p < 0.001) and normal subjects (1.06 ± 0.20, p < 0.001). There were no differences between RCM patients and normal subjects in the RAR (p = 0.452). At a cut-off value of 1.32 for the RAR, the sensitivity was 82.6%, and the specificity was 86.4% in the detection of CP. Septal bounce was identified in 95.7% CP patients, in none of RCM patients and normal subjects. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was present in 31.8% RCM patients and absence in all CP patients and normal subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

CMR with LGE and RAR can facilitate differentiation of CP from RCM.