Published February 2016 | Version v1
Journal article

Comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in corticosteroid-naive patients with conduction system disease due to cardiac sarcoidosis

  • 1. University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Arrhythmia Service, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  • 2. University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Molecular Function and Imaging Program, National Cardiac PET Centre, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  • 3. University of Ottawa, Department of Radiology, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  • 4. The Ottawa Hospital, Medical Imaging Department, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  • 5. University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Cardiovascular Research Methods Center, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  • 6. The Ottawa Hospital, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Medicine, Ottawa, Ontario (Canada)
  • 7. Hokkaido University School of Medicine, Department of Molecular Imaging, Hokkaido (Japan)
  • 8. Hokkaido University School of Medicine, First Department of Medicine, Hokkaido (Japan)
  • 9. Hokkaido University School of Medicine, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hokkaido (Japan)
  • 10. Hokkaido University Hospital, Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hokkaido (Japan)

Description

Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) is a cause of conduction system disease (CSD). 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG PET) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) are used for detection of CS. The relative diagnostic value of these has not been well studied. The aim was to compare these imaging modalities in this population. We recruited steroid-naive patients with newly diagnosed CSD due to CS. All CS patients underwent both imaging studies within 12 weeks of each other. Patients were classified into two groups: group A with chronic mild CSD (right bundle branch block and/or axis deviation), and group B with new-onset atrioventricular block (AVB, Mobitz type II or third-degree AVB). Thirty patients were included. Positive findings on both imaging studies were seen in 72 % of patients (13/18) in group A and in 58 % of patients (7/12) in group B. The remainder (28 %) of the patients in group A were positive only on CMR. Of the patients in group B, 8 % were positive only on CMR and 33 % were positive only on FDG PET. Patients in group A were more likely to be positive only on CMR, and patients in group B were more likely to be positive only on FDG PET (p = 0.02). Patients in group B positive only on FDG PET underwent CMR earlier relative to their symptomatology than patients positive only on CMR (median 7.0, IQR 1.5 - 34.3, vs. 72.0, IQR 25.0 - 79.5 days; p = 0.03). The number of positive FDG PET and CMR studies was different in patients with CSD depending on their clinical presentation. This study demonstrated that CMR can adequately detect cardiac involvement associated with chronic mild CSD. In patients presenting with new-onset AVB and a negative CMR study, FDG PET may be useful for detecting cardiac involvement due to CS. (orig.)

Availability note (English)

Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3181-8

Additional details

Identifiers

Publishing Information

Journal Title
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Journal Volume
43
Journal Issue
2
Journal Page Range
p. 259-269
ISSN
1619-7070