Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis

ABSTRACT: Background: Accurate diagnosis of transthyretin amyloidosis cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) and its differentiation from light-chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis (CA) cases (AL-CM) are of paramount importance. Surprisingly, comparative imaging data based on concurrent cardiovascular magnetic resonan...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Josefin Obergassel, Michael Bietenbeck, Nuriye Akyol, Volker Vehof, Claudia Meier, Maria Theofanidou, Philipp Stalling, Ali Yilmaz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2025-01-01
Series:Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1097664725000213
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849725995139989504
author Josefin Obergassel
Michael Bietenbeck
Nuriye Akyol
Volker Vehof
Claudia Meier
Maria Theofanidou
Philipp Stalling
Ali Yilmaz
author_facet Josefin Obergassel
Michael Bietenbeck
Nuriye Akyol
Volker Vehof
Claudia Meier
Maria Theofanidou
Philipp Stalling
Ali Yilmaz
author_sort Josefin Obergassel
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT: Background: Accurate diagnosis of transthyretin amyloidosis cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) and its differentiation from light-chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis (CA) cases (AL-CM) are of paramount importance. Surprisingly, comparative imaging data based on concurrent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and bone scintigraphy in the same patients with biopsy-proven diagnosis of CA are still rare. Methods: This was a real-world retrospective single-center study based on a local clinical care pipeline and we carefully analyzed clinical, laboratory, CMR, and bone scintigraphy data (and if necessary additional endomyocardial biopsy [EMB] data) in patients with suspected CA. As a major inclusion criterion, we only looked at those patients who underwent both a CMR study and a bone scintigraphy—with a clear-cut imaging finding detected by at least one imaging method. Results: One hundred twenty three patients in whom the final diagnosis was obtained either non-invasively based on combined findings from bone scintigraphy and monoclonal protein studies or invasively based on additional EMB findings were included. A positive CMR result indicating the presence of CA was found in 121 patients—suggesting a CMR sensitivity of 98.4% for the diagnosis of any CA. Bone scintigraphy identified 18 patients with low to moderate uptake (Perugini score = 0–1) and 105 patients with high uptake (Perugini score ≥2)—resulting in a sensitivity for bone scintigraphy of 85.4% for the diagnosis of any CA. There was an agreement (“diagnostic match”) between CMR and bone scintigraphy results in 103 patients (84%) of the total study cohort, while a discrepancy (“diagnostic mismatch”) was observed in 20 patients (16%). In 18 out of these 20 diagnostic mismatch cases, CMR correctly diagnosed the presence of CA despite a negative or inconclusive result on bone scintigraphy (8 with AL-CM, 8 with ATTR-CM, and 2 with EMB-proven but unspecified CA). Conclusion: CMR shows a substantially higher diagnostic yield for the diagnosis of CA compared to bone scintigraphy, if a real-world cohort of patients comprising different subtypes of CA is looked at, since CMR does not only detect ATTR-CM but also depicts other CA subtypes such as AL. In case of a clear-cut positive CMR result unequivocally indicative of CA, there is no incremental diagnostic value of an additionally performed bone scintigraphy.
format Article
id doaj-art-a20f49d04d70448e930df53e0b65922d
institution DOAJ
issn 1097-6647
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
spelling doaj-art-a20f49d04d70448e930df53e0b65922d2025-08-20T03:10:20ZengElsevierJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance1097-66472025-01-0127110185910.1016/j.jocmr.2025.101859Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosisJosefin Obergassel0Michael Bietenbeck1Nuriye Akyol2Volker Vehof3Claudia Meier4Maria Theofanidou5Philipp Stalling6Ali Yilmaz7Department of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyDepartment of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyDepartment of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyDepartment of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyDepartment of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyDepartment of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyDepartment of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyCorresponding author.; Department of Cardiology I, Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, University Hospital Münster, Münster, GermanyABSTRACT: Background: Accurate diagnosis of transthyretin amyloidosis cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) and its differentiation from light-chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis (CA) cases (AL-CM) are of paramount importance. Surprisingly, comparative imaging data based on concurrent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and bone scintigraphy in the same patients with biopsy-proven diagnosis of CA are still rare. Methods: This was a real-world retrospective single-center study based on a local clinical care pipeline and we carefully analyzed clinical, laboratory, CMR, and bone scintigraphy data (and if necessary additional endomyocardial biopsy [EMB] data) in patients with suspected CA. As a major inclusion criterion, we only looked at those patients who underwent both a CMR study and a bone scintigraphy—with a clear-cut imaging finding detected by at least one imaging method. Results: One hundred twenty three patients in whom the final diagnosis was obtained either non-invasively based on combined findings from bone scintigraphy and monoclonal protein studies or invasively based on additional EMB findings were included. A positive CMR result indicating the presence of CA was found in 121 patients—suggesting a CMR sensitivity of 98.4% for the diagnosis of any CA. Bone scintigraphy identified 18 patients with low to moderate uptake (Perugini score = 0–1) and 105 patients with high uptake (Perugini score ≥2)—resulting in a sensitivity for bone scintigraphy of 85.4% for the diagnosis of any CA. There was an agreement (“diagnostic match”) between CMR and bone scintigraphy results in 103 patients (84%) of the total study cohort, while a discrepancy (“diagnostic mismatch”) was observed in 20 patients (16%). In 18 out of these 20 diagnostic mismatch cases, CMR correctly diagnosed the presence of CA despite a negative or inconclusive result on bone scintigraphy (8 with AL-CM, 8 with ATTR-CM, and 2 with EMB-proven but unspecified CA). Conclusion: CMR shows a substantially higher diagnostic yield for the diagnosis of CA compared to bone scintigraphy, if a real-world cohort of patients comprising different subtypes of CA is looked at, since CMR does not only detect ATTR-CM but also depicts other CA subtypes such as AL. In case of a clear-cut positive CMR result unequivocally indicative of CA, there is no incremental diagnostic value of an additionally performed bone scintigraphy.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1097664725000213Cardiac amyloidosisCMRBone scintigraphyATTRAL
spellingShingle Josefin Obergassel
Michael Bietenbeck
Nuriye Akyol
Volker Vehof
Claudia Meier
Maria Theofanidou
Philipp Stalling
Ali Yilmaz
Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Cardiac amyloidosis
CMR
Bone scintigraphy
ATTR
AL
title Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
title_full Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
title_fullStr Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
title_short Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
title_sort diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance in cardiac amyloidosis
topic Cardiac amyloidosis
CMR
Bone scintigraphy
ATTR
AL
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1097664725000213
work_keys_str_mv AT josefinobergassel diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT michaelbietenbeck diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT nuriyeakyol diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT volkervehof diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT claudiameier diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT mariatheofanidou diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT philippstalling diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis
AT aliyilmaz diagnosticvalueofbonescintigraphyversuscardiovascularmagneticresonanceincardiacamyloidosis