Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation of Cardiac Tumors: Updated 2021 WHO Tumor Classification.

Cardiac tumors, although rare, carry high morbidity and mortality rates. They are commonly first identified either at echocardiography or incidentally at thoracoabdominal CT performed for noncardiac indications. Multimodality imaging often helps to determine the cause of these masses. Cardiac tumors comprise a distinct category in the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors. The updated 2021 WHO classification of tumors of the heart incorporates new entities and reclassifies others. In the new classification system, papillary fibroelastoma is recognized as the most common primary cardiac neoplasm. Pseudotumors including thrombi and anatomic variants (eg, crista terminalis, accessory papillary muscles, or coumadin ridge) are the most common intracardiac masses identified at imaging. Cardiac metastases are substantially more common than primary cardiac tumors. Although echocardiography is usually the first examination, cardiac MRI is the modality of choice for the identification and characterization of cardiac masses. Cardiac CT serves as an alternative in patients who cannot tolerate MRI. PET performed with CT or MRI enables metabolic characterization of malignant cardiac masses. Imaging individualized to a particular tumor type and location is crucial for treatment planning. Tumor terminology changes as our understanding of tumor biology and behavior evolves. Familiarity with the updated classification system is important as a guide to radiologic investigation and medical or surgical management. ©RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Bend but don't break: Experience of a diverse New York City lung cancer screening program during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic led to the national shutdown and subsequent reopening of cancer screening programs. Our diverse inner-city lung cancer screening program serves patients in the Bronx NY, which was severely affected by COVID-19, with the highest mortality in New York State in the spring of 2020. Staffing redeployment, quarantine protocols, increased safety measures, and changes in follow up resulted. The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of the pandemic on lung cancer screening volumes during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective cohort comprised of all patients enrolled in our Bronx, NY lung cancer screening program from March 2019 to March 2021 who underwent LDCT or appropriate follow-up imaging. The pre-pandemic and pandemic period were defined as 3/28/2019 to 3/21/2020 and 3/22/2020 to 3/17/2021, respectively, dichotomized by the New York State lockdown. RESULTS: 1218 exams were performed in the pre-pandemic period and 857 in the pandemic period, a 29.6% decrease. The percentage of exams performed on newly enrolled patients decreased from 32.7% to 13.8% (p < 0.001). Patients in the pre-pandemic period and pandemic period respectively had the following demographic breakdown: mean age 66.9 ± 5.9 vs 66.5 ± 6.0, women 51.9% vs 51.6%, White 20.7% vs 20.3%, Hispanic/Latino 42.0% vs 36.3%. There was no significant difference in Lung-RADS scores for pre-pandemic and pandemic exams (p > 0.05). In the pandemic period, exam volume followed an inverted parabolic pattern, reflecting Covid surges for the cohort and all demographic subgroups. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly decreased lung cancer screening volume and new enrollment in our urban inner-city program. Screening volumes demonstrated a parabolic curve reflecting pandemic surges following the initial wave, unlike other reports. The combination of the impact of COVID on our population and lack of staffing redundancy in the screening program, in the face of typical COVID isolation and quarantine absences, impeded early pandemic rebound of our lung cancer screening program. This highlights the necessity of fostering resilience by developing robust programmatic resources.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Cardiac End-Organ Damage in Women: Findings From an Echocardiographic Study Across the United States.

BACKGROUND: People with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have been reported to have increased risk of clinical and subclinical cardiovascular disease. Existing studies have focused on men and often have been uncontrolled or lacked adequate HIV-negative comparators. METHODS: We performed echocardiography in the Women's Interagency HIV Study to investigate associations of HIV and HIV-specific factors with cardiac phenotypes, including left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), isolated LV diastolic dysfunction (LVDD), left atrial enlargement (LAE), LV hypertrophy (LVH), and increased tricuspid regurgitation velocity (TRV). RESULTS: Of 1654 participants (age 51 ± 9 years), 70% had HIV. Sixty-three (5.4%) women with HIV (WWH) had LVSD; 71 (6.5%) had isolated LVDD. Compared with women without HIV (WWOH), WWH had a near-significantly increased risk of LVSD (adjusted relative risk = 1.69; 95% confidence interval = 1.00 to 2.86; P = .051). No significant association was noted for HIV seropositivity with other phenotypes, but there was a risk gradient for decreasing CD4+ count among WWH that approached or reached significance for isolated LVDD, LAE, and LVH. WWH with CD4+ count <200 cells/mm3 had significantly higher prevalence of LAE, LVH, and high TRV than WWOH. There were no consistent associations for viral suppression or antiretroviral drug exposure. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that WWH have a higher risk of LVSD compared with sociodemographically similar WWOH, but their risk for isolated LVDD, LAE, LVH, and high TRV is increased only with reduced CD4+ count. Although these findings warrant replication, they support the importance of cardiovascular risk-factor and HIV-disease control for heart disease prevention in this population.

Feasibility of high-intensity interval training in patients with left ventricular assist devices: a pilot study.

AIMS: Patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) suffer from persistent exercise limitation despite improvement of their heart failure syndrome. Exercise training (ET) programmes to improve aerobic capacity have shown modest efficacy. High-intensity interval training (HIIT), as an alternative to moderate continuous training, has not been systematically tested in this population. We examine the feasibility of a short, personalized HIIT programme in patients with LVAD and describe its effects on aerobic capacity and left ventricular remodelling. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients on durable LVAD support were prospectively enrolled in a 15-session, 5 week HIIT programme. Turndown echocardiogram, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, and cardiopulmonary exercise test were performed before and after HIIT. Training workloads for each subject were based on pretraining peak cardiopulmonary exercise test work rate (W). Percentage of prescribed training workload completed and adverse events were recorded for each subject. Fifteen subjects were enrolled [10 men, age = 51 (29-71) years, HeartMate II = 12, HeartMate 3 = 3, and time on LVAD = 18 (3-64) months]. Twelve completed post-training testing. HIIT was well tolerated, and 90% (inter-quartile range: 78, 99%) of the prescribed workload (W) was completed with no major adverse events. Improvements were seen in aV̇O2 at ventilatory threshold [7.1 (6.5, 9.1) to 8.5 (7.7, 9.3) mL/kg/min, P = 0.04], work rate at ventilatory threshold [44 (14, 54) to 55 (21, 66) W, P = 0.05], and left ventricular end-diastolic volume [168 (144, 216) to 159 (124, 212) mL, n = 7, P = 0.02]. HIIT had no effect on maximal oxygen consumption (V̇O2peak ) or Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiopulmonary exercise test-guided HIIT is feasible and can improve submaximal aerobic capacity in stable patients with chronic LVAD support. Further studies are needed on its effects on the myocardium and its potential role in cardiac rehabilitation programmes.

Comparison Between Anatomical and Functional Imaging Modalities for Evaluation of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department.

Evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (ED) frequently employs a noninvasive strategy, including coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), stress echocardiography (SE), or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). We sought to report the real-world experience of utilizing CCTA compared with SE and MPI at an urban hospital ED. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutively enrolled patients presenting with chest pain who had normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG), negative initial troponin-T, at least intermediate risk based on modified Diamond-Forrester criteria, and who underwent CCTA, SE, or MPI based on their individual test eligibility criteria. The primary outcome was ED discharge time. Secondary outcomes included test utilization and 30-days rehospitalization rates. The 2,143 patients who were included (mean age was 56 ± 12 years; 55% women) utilization rate (test performed/eligible) was lower for CCTA (n = 354/1,329) and MPI (n = 530/1,435) compared with SE (n = 1,259/1,650), p <0.001. Mean ED discharge times for both CCTA and SE were 12.5 ± 7.4 versus 16 ± 7.3 hours for MPI (p <0.0001). Patients with SE and CCTA were less likely to undergo coronary angiography (29%, 25%, vs 52% for MPI). There was a 1% cardiac-related 30-days rehospitalization rate in the CCTA group versus 1% in SE and 3% in the MPI group (p <0.01). In conclusion, CCTA and SE were associated with faster ED discharge and lower frequency of diagnostic coronary angiography. Notwithstanding its clinical utility, CCTA was underutilized at our large urban ED setting.