Reconsideration of the ECG in pericarditis; have we been led astray all these years?

Recently, new criteria for the diagnosis of pericarditis have been published. This paper has been thought to point out the limits in the new criteria specificity as well in the application of the new criteria for the diagnosis of pericarditis as recently demonstrated by studies based on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. We report the case of A 18y old male with no significant past medical history who presented with complaints of chest pain typical for pericarditis, initially labeled as pericarditis; the patient was evaluated by electrocardiography, trans-thoracic echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; the condition, based on electrocardiogram and trans-thoracic echocardiography findings, was labeled as pericarditis in keeping with current diagnostic criteria. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated myocardial edema with no T2-defined pericardial inflammation on TIR/T2 imaging; late gadolinium enhancement imaging demonstrated multiple irregular, punctate, epicardial zones. The constellation of findings was consistent with acute myocarditis without pericardial involvement. In conclusion, limits in specificity of the newly published criteria for diagnosis of pericarditis, which add to the already demonstrated limits in sensitivity, subsist. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging plays a unique role in the initial assessment of pericarditis; this is particularly important in the Covid-19 era in light of the increasing incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis; also, the case suggests that the combination of information between advanced echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging may have an important diagnostic role in this setting. Additionally, we suggest that despite recent enthusiasm for colchicine, its role may be best defined in those with myocarditis, not pericarditis.