Show simple item record

 
dc.contributorVall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus
dc.contributor.authorWilzeck, Verena Charlotte
dc.contributor.authorMandoli, Giulia Elena
dc.contributor.authorDemirkiran, Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorAndroulakis, Emmanuel
dc.contributor.authorSoliman Aboumarie, Hatem
dc.contributor.authorGiannopoulos, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Palomares, José F
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-07T11:37:39Z
dc.date.available2025-11-07T11:37:39Z
dc.date.issued2025-07
dc.identifier.citationWilzeck VC, Mandoli GE, Demirkiran A, Androulakis E, Soliman Aboumarie H, Giannopoulos AA, et al. European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging survey on imaging for myocardial viability. Eur Hear J - Imaging Methods Pract. 2025 Jul;3(2):qyaf095.
dc.identifier.issn2755-9637
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11351/14042
dc.descriptionCardiac computed tomography angiography; Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Coronary artery disease
dc.description.abstractAims To evaluate the current role and practice patterns in myocardial viability assessment through a European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) survey. Methods and results A total of 179 participants from 54 countries completed the survey. Most participants worked in tertiary centres (60.3%). Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) was the most widely available modality (98.3%), followed by stress echocardiography (86.6%), cardiac computed tomography angiography (87.7%), and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR, 84.9%). Single-photon emission computed tomography and positron emission tomography were less accessible (59.8 and 40.2%, respectively). CMR was the preferred imaging modality (76.0%), followed by TTE (41.9%), which were also the most frequently used techniques in clinical practice (42.7 and 38.7%, respectively). Viability imaging was regularly used by most respondents in patients with chronic ischaemic heart disease (57.0%) and prior to revascularization for chronic total occlusions (58.7%). Among late-presenting ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients, 60.7% of respondents assessed viability within index hospitalization or the first month, whereas 28.3% performed viability imaging after 1–3 months. However, considerable variation exists between respondents. Revascularization decisions were guided by viability findings with revascularization of only viable segments in 49.1% of cases, while 40.0% reported revascularizing all high-grade stenoses if any viable myocardium was present. Conclusion This study highlights the variability in myocardial viability imaging practices across Europe, with differences in availability, preferred modalities, and clinical application. While CMR and TTE remain the dominant modalities, standardization of imaging protocols and further research are needed to optimize viability assessment and its impact on revascularization decisions.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEuropean Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and Practice;3(2)
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourceScientia
dc.subjectEnquestes
dc.subjectCor - Imatgeria
dc.subjectMalalties coronàries - Imatgeria
dc.subjectMiocardi - Imatgeria
dc.subject.meshSurveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.meshCoronary Artery Disease
dc.subject.meshMyocardium
dc.subject.meshCardiac Imaging Techniques
dc.subject.meshCoronary Disease
dc.titleEuropean Association of Cardiovascular Imaging survey on imaging for myocardial viability
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf095
dc.subject.decsencuestas y cuestionarios
dc.subject.decsenfermedad arterial coronaria
dc.subject.decsmiocardio
dc.subject.decsenfermedad coronaria
dc.subject.decstécnicas de imagen cardíaca
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf095
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.audienceProfessionals
dc.contributor.organismesInstitut Català de la Salut
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Wilzeck VC] Department of Cardiology, University Heart Center, University Hospital Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland. Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland. Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University and ETH Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland. [Mandoli GE] Department of Medical Biotechnologies, Division of Cardiology, University of Siena, Siena, Italy. [Demirkiran A] Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Department of Cardiology, Kocaeli City Hospital, Kocaeli, Türkiye. [Androulakis E] King’s College Hospital, London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine & Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK. [Soliman Aboumarie H] School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine & Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK. Department of Cardiothoracic Anaethesia, Intensive Care and Mechanical Circulatory Support, Harefield Hospital, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK. [Giannopoulos AA] Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiac Imaging, University Hospital Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland. [Palomares JF] Servei de Cardiologia, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. Grup de Recerca de Malalties Cardiovasculars, Vall d’Hebron Institut de Recerca (VHIR), Barcelona, Spain. Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. Departament de Medicina, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain. CIBER de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
dc.identifier.pmid40874196
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record