Comparing the findings and diagnostic sensitivity of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in biopsy confirmed acute myocarditis with infarct-like vs. heart failure presentation.

backgroundCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is considered the reference imaging modality in providing a non-invasive diagnosis of acute myocarditis (AM), as it allows for the detection of myocardial injury associated with AM. However, the diagnostic sensitivity and pattern of CMR findings appear to differ according to clinical presentation.

methodsThis is a retrospective cross-sectional study. Consecutive adult patients presenting to a single tertiary centre in South Africa between August 2017 and January 2022 with AM confirmed on endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) were enrolled. Patients with infarct-like symptoms, defined as those presenting primarily with chest pain syndrome with associated ST-T wave changes on electrocardiogram, or heart failure (HF) symptoms, defined as clinical signs and symptoms of HF without significant chest discomfort, were compared using contrasted CMR and parametric techniques with EMB confirmation of AM as diagnostic gold standard.

resultsForty-one patients were identified including 23 (56%) with infarct-like symptoms and 18 (44%) with HF symptoms. On CMR, the infarct-like group had significantly higher ejection fractions of both ventricles (LVEF 55.3 ± 15.3% vs. 34.4 ± 13.5%, p < 0.001; RVEF 57.3 ± 10.9% vs. 42.9 ± 18.2%, p = 0.008), without significant differences in end diastolic volumes (LVEDVI 82.7 ± 30.3 ml/m

conclusionThe pattern of CMR findings and its diagnostic sensitivity appears to differ in AM patients presenting with infarct-like and HF symptoms. Although the sensitivity of the LLC improved with the addition of parametric mapping in the HF group, it remained lower than that of the infarct-like group, and suggests that EMB should be considered earlier in the course of patients with clinically suspected AM presenting with HF.