Cardiac MRI and radionuclide ventriculography for measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction in ICD candidates

Publication date: October 2018
Source:Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Volume 52
Author(s): Vamshi K. Kotha, Djeven P. Deva, Kim A. Connelly, Michael R. Freeman, Raymond T. Yan, Iqwal Mangat, Anish Kirpalani, Joseph J. Barfett, Joanna Sloninko, Hui Ming Lin, John J. Graham, Andrew M. Crean, Laura Jimenez-Juan, Paul Dorian, Andrew T. Yan
ObjectiveCurrent guidelines provide left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) criterion for use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) but do not specify which modality to use for measurement. We compared LVEF measurements by radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) vs cardiac MRI (CMR) in ICD candidates to assess impact on clinical decision making.MethodsThis single-centre study included 124 consecutive patients referred for assessment of ICD implantation who underwent RNV and CMR within 30 days for LVEF measurement. RNV and CMR were interpreted independently by experienced readers.ResultsAmong 124 patients (age 64 ± 11 years, 77% male), median interval between CMR and RNV was 1 day; mean LVEF was 32 ± 12% by CMR and 33 ± 11% by RNV (p = 0.60). LVEF by CMR and RNV showed good correlation, but Bland-Altman analysis showed relatively wide limits of agreement (−12.1 to 11.4). CMR LVEF reclassified 26 (21%) patients compared to RNV LVEF (kappa = 0.58). LVEF by both modalities showed good interobserver reproducibility (ICC 0.96 and 0.94, respectively) (limits of agreement −7.27 to 5.75 and −8.63 to 6.34, respectively).ConclusionAlthough LVEF measurements by CMR and RNV show moderate agreement, there is frequent reclassification of patients for ICD placement based on LVEF between these modalities. Future studies should determine if a particular imaging modality for LVEF measurement may enhance ICD decision making and treatment benefit.