CMR native T1 and T2 Mapping in Olympic athletes: the influence of sport discipline and sex.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) has a growing role in evaluating athletes' hearts. Mapping techniques provide added value for tissue characterisation, but data on athletes and sports disciplines are lacking. AIM: To describe native mapping values in a cohort of Olympic Athletes and evaluate the influence of sports discipline and sex. METHODS: A group of 300 Olympic athletes (13% skill, 20% power, 25% mixed, 42% endurance, 58% male) with unremarkable cardiovascular screening and a control group of 42 sedentary subjects (52% male) underwent CMR without contrast administration. Athletes were divided based on sex and sports categories according to the ESC classification. RESULTS: Among athletes of different sports categories and controls, endurance presented the lowest value of T1 mapping (p<0.001). No differences in T2 mapping were observed (p=0.472). Female athletes had higher values of T1 native myocardial mapping compared to males (p=0.001), while there were no differences in T2 mapping (p=0.817). Male athletes with higher left ventricular mass indexed (LV-Massi) had lower values of T1 mapping (p=0.006) and slightly higher values of T2 mapping, even if not significant (p=0.150). Female athletes with higher LV-Massi did not show significant differences in T1 and T2 mapping (p=0.053 and p=0.438). CONCLUSIONS: T1 native myocardial mapping showed significant differences related to sports disciplines and gender. Athletes with the largest LV remodelling, mostly endurance and mixed, showed the lowest values of T1 mapping. Male athletes showed lower values of T1 mapping than females. No significant differences were observed in T2 mapping related to sports disciplines and gender.

The role of cardiac magnetic resonance in sports cardiology: results from a large cohort of athletes.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) provides information on morpho-functional abnormalities and myocardial tissue characterisation. Appropriate indications for CMR in athletes are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the CMR performed at our Institute to evaluate variables associated with pathologic findings in a large cohort of athletes presenting with different clinical conditions. METHODS: All the CMR performed at our Institute in athletes aged > 14 years were recruited. CMR indications were investigated. CMR was categorised as "positive" or "negative" based on the presence of morphological and/or functional abnormalities and/or the presence of late gadolinium enhancement (excluding the right ventricular insertion point), fat infiltration, or oedema. Variables associated with "positive" CMR were explored. RESULTS: A total of 503 CMR were included in the analysis. "Negative" and "positive" CMR were 61% and 39%, respectively. Uncommon ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) were the most frequent indications for CMR, but the proportion of positive results was low (37%), and only polymorphic ventricular patterns were associated with positive CMR (p = 0.006). T-wave inversion at 12-lead ECG, particularly on lateral and inferolateral leads, was associated with positive CMR in 34% of athletes (p = 0.05). Echocardiography abnormalities resulted in a large proportion (58%) of positive CMR, mostly cardiomyopathies. CONCLUSION: CMR is more efficient in identifying a pathologic cardiac substrate in athletes in case of VAs (i.e., polymorphic beats), abnormal ECG repolarisation (negative T-waves in inferolateral leads), and borderline echocardiographic findings (LV hypertrophy, mildly depressed LV function). On the other hand, CMR is associated with a large proportion of negative results. Therefore, a careful clinical selection is needed to indicate CMR in athletes appropriately.

Low prevalence of cardiac abnormalities in competitive athletes at return-to-play after COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the prevalence of cardiac involvement after COVID-19 in competitive athletes at return-to-play (RTP) evaluation, following the recommended Italian protocol including cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) and 24-Hour Holter monitoring. DESIGN AND METHODS: this is a single centre observational, cross-sectional study. Since October 2020, all competitive athletes (age ≥ 14 years) evaluated in our Institute after COVID-19, prior RTP were enrolled. The protocol dictated by the Italian governing bodies included: 12­lead ECG, blood test, CPET, 24-h ECG monitoring, spirometry. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) was performed based on clinical indication. RESULTS: 219 consecutive athletes were examined (59% male), age 23 years (IQR 19-27), 21% asymptomatic, 77% mildly symptomatic, 2% with previous pneumonia. The evaluation was performed after a median of 10 (6-17) days from negative SARS-CoV-2 swab. All athletes showed a good exercise capacity at CPET without cardiovascular and respiratory limitations. Uncommon premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) were found in 9.5% (n = 21) at CPET/Holter ECG monitoring. Two athletes (0.9%) were diagnosed with acute myocarditis (by CMR) and another one with new pericardial effusion. All the three athletes were temporally restricted from sport participation. CONCLUSIONS: Myocarditis in competitive athletes screened after COVID-19 resolution was detected in a low minority of the cases (0.9%). However, a non-negligible prevalence of uncommon PVCs (9%) was observed, either at CPET and/or Holter ECG monitoring, including all athletes with COVID-19 related cardiovascular abnormalities.

The role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the screening before the return-to-play of elite athletes after COVID-19: utility o futility?

Recent reports based on cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) showed a wide range of prevalence of inflammatory heart diseases in COVID-19 convalescent athletes ranging from 0.4 up to 15%. These observations had an important impact in the field of sport cardiology opening an intense debate around the best possible screening strategy before the return-to-play. The diagnostic yield of CMR for detecting acute inflammatory disease is undebatable. However, the opportunity to use it in the screening protocol after COVID-19 has been questioned. Current evidence does not seem to support the routine use of CMR and the prescription of CMR should be based upon clinical indication.