A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Usefulness of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for Recurrent Pericarditis. | LitMetric

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) offers the capability to objectively detect pericarditis by identifying pericardial thickening, edema/inflammation by Short-TI Inversion Recovery-T2 weighted (STIR-T2w) imaging, edema/inflammation or fibrosis by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), and presence of pericardial effusion. This is especially helpful for the diagnosis of recurrent pericarditis. Aim of the present paper is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of CMR findings as well as their potential prognostic value for the diagnosis of recurrent pericarditis. Multicenter cohort study of consecutive patients with recurrent pericarditis evaluated by CMR. We included 128 consecutive cases (60 males, 47%; mean age 48 ± 14 years). CMR was performed at a mean time of 12 days (95% confidence interval 15 to 21) after the clinical diagnosis. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy and areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for CMR diagnostic criteria and complications (additional recurrences, cardiac tamponade, and constrictive pericarditis). Areas under the ROC curve were respectively 64% for pericardial thickening, 84% for pericardial edema, 82% for pericardial LGE, and 71% for pericardial effusion. After a mean follow-up of 34 months, recurrences occurred in 52% of patients, tamponade in 6%, and constrictive pericarditis in 11%. Using a multivariable Cox model, elevation of CRP and presence of CMR pericardial thickening were predictors of adverse events, whereas the presence of CMR LGE was associated with a lower risk. The prognostic model for adverse events using gender, age, CRP level, and all CMR variables showed a C-index of 0.84. In conclusion, CMR findings show high diagnostic accuracy and may help identifying patients at higher risk of complications.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.09.026DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

recurrent pericarditis
16
pericardial thickening
12
diagnostic accuracy
12
cmr
9
cardiac magnetic
8
magnetic resonance
8
pericardial effusion
8
diagnosis recurrent
8
cmr findings
8
roc curve
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!