Imaging of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: An Update and Future Aspects.

Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS), an increasingly recognized disease of unknown etiology, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Given the limited diagnostic yield of traditional endomyocardial biopsy (EMB), there is increasing reliance on multimodality cardiovascular imaging in the diagnosis and management of CS, with EMB being largely supplanted by the use of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). This article aims to provide a comprehensive review of imaging modalities currently utilized in the screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of CS, while highlighting the latest developments in each area.

PET Imaging in Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Narrative Review with Focus on Novel PET Tracers.

Sarcoidosis is a multi-system inflammatory disease characterized by the development of inflammation and noncaseating granulomas that can involve nearly every organ system, with a predilection for the pulmonary system. Cardiac involvement of sarcoidosis (CS) occurs in up to 70% of cases, and accounts for a significant share of sarcoid-related mortality. The clinical presentation of CS can range from absence of symptoms to conduction abnormalities, heart failure, arrhythmias, valvular disease, and sudden cardiac death. Given the significant morbidity and mortality associated with CS, timely diagnosis is important. Traditional imaging modalities and histologic evaluation by endomyocardial biopsy often provide a low diagnostic yield. Cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) has emerged as a leading advanced imaging modality for the diagnosis and management of CS. This review article will summarize several aspects of the current use of PET in CS, including indications for use, patient preparation, image acquisition and interpretation, diagnostic and prognostic performance, and evaluation of treatment response. Additionally, this review will discuss novel PET radiotracers currently under study or of potential interest in CS.

Outcomes Among Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Minimally Invasive Strategy Versus Conventional Strategy.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of TAVR technique on in-hospital and 30-day outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and reduced ejection fraction (EF). BACKGROUND: Patients with AS and concomitant low EF may be at risk for adverse hemodynamic effects from general anesthesia utilized in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) via the conventional strategy (CS). These patients may be better suited for the minimally invasive strategy (MIS), which employs conscious sedation. However, data are lacking that compare MIS to CS in patients with AS and concomitant low EF. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we identified all patients with low EF (<50%) undergoing transfemoral MIS-TAVR vs CS-TAVR between March 2011 and May 2018. Our primary endpoint was defined as the composite of in-hospital mortality and major periprocedural bleeding or vascular complications. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy patients had EF <50%, while 154 patients had EF ≤35%. Overall, a total of 236 patients were in the MIS group and 34 were in the CS group. Baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar except for Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score (MIS 8.4 ± 5.1 vs CS 11.7 ± 6.8; P<.01). There were no differences between the two groups in incidence of the primary endpoint (MIS 5.5% vs CS 8.8%; odds ratio for MIS, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-2.23; P=.45). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe AS and reduced EF, MIS was not associated with adverse in-hospital or 30-day clinical outcomes compared with CS. In these patients, MIS may be a suitable alternative to CS without compromising clinical outcomes.