BackgroundCardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is increasingly used to assess heart diseases. Relevant non-cardiac diseases may also be incidentally found on CMR images. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and nature of incidental extra-cardiac findings (IEF) and their clinical impact in non-selected patients referred for CMR.Material/MethodsMR images of 762 consecutive patients (515 men, age: 56±18 years) referred for CMR were prospectively interpreted by 2 radiologists blinded for any previous imaging study. IEFs were classified as major when requiring treatment, follow-up, or further investigation. Clinical follow-up was performed by checking hospital information records and by calling referring physicians. The 2 endpoints were: 1) non-cardiac death and new treatment related to major IEFs, and 2) hospitalization related to major IEFs during follow-up.ResultsMajor IEFs were proven in 129 patients (18.6% of the study population), 14% of those being unknown before CMR. During 15±6 month follow-up, treatment of confirmed major IEFs was initiated in 1.4%, and no non-cardiac deaths occurred. Hospitalization occurred in 8 patients (1.0% of the study population) with confirmed major IEFs and none occurred in the remaining 110 patients with unconfirmed/unexplored major IEFs (p<0.001).ConclusionsScreening for major IEFs in a population referred for routine CMR changed management in 1.4% of patients. Major IEFs unknown before CMR but without further exploration, however, carried a favorable prognosis over a follow-up period of 15 months.
BackgroundModel-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) reduces image noise and improves image quality (IQ) but its influence on post-processing tools including maximal intensity projection (MIP) and minimal intensity projection (mIP) remains unknown.PurposeTo evaluate the influence on IQ of MBIR on native, mIP, MIP axial and coronal reformats of reduced dose computed tomography (RD-CT) chest acquisition.Material and MethodsRaw data of 50 patients, who underwent a standard dose CT (SD-CT) and a follow-up RD-CT with a CT dose index (CTDI) of 2–3 mGy, were reconstructed by MBIR and FBP. Native slices, 4-mm-thick MIP, and 3-mm-thick mIP axial and coronal reformats were generated. The relative IQ, subjective IQ, image noise, and number of artifacts were determined in order to compare different reconstructions of RD-CT with reference SD-CT.ResultsThe lowest noise was observed with MBIR. RD-CT reconstructed by MBIR exhibited the best relative and subjective IQ on coronal view regardless of the post-processing tool. MBIR generated the lowest rate of artefacts on coronal mIP/MIP reformats and the highest one on axial reformats, mainly represented by distortions and stairsteps artifacts.ConclusionThe MBIR algorithm reduces image noise but generates more artifacts than FBP on axial mIP and MIP reformats of RD-CT. Conversely, it significantly improves IQ on coronal views, without increasing artifacts, regardless of the post-processing technique.
With the increased use of implanted venous access devices (IVADs) for continuous long-term venous access, several techniques such as percutaneous endovascular fibrin sheath removal, have been described, to maintain catheter function. Most standard techniques do not capture the stripped fibrin sheath, which is subsequently released in the pulmonary circulation and may lead to symptomatic pulmonary embolism. The presented case describes an endovascular technique which includes stripping, capture, and removal of fibrin sheath using a novel filter device. A 64-year-old woman presented with IVAD dysfunction. Stripping was performed using a co-axial snare to the filter to capture the fibrin sheath. The captured fragment was subsequently removed for visual and pathological verification. No immediate complication was observed and the patient was discharged the day of the procedure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.