Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 15, 2025

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for the Evaluation of Suspected Cardiac Thrombus: Conventional and Emerging Techniques
Published on: June 11, 2019
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Coronary Angiography as Primary Strategy in Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure
Gülmisal Güder1, Theresa Reiter2, Wolfgang R Bauer1
1Comprehensive Heart Failure Center, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany; Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Insights
A cardiac MRI-first strategy can diagnose ischemic cardiomyopathy with similar sensitivity to invasive coronary angiography, potentially reducing unnecessary procedures for heart failure patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Diagnostic Imaging
- Heart Failure Research
Background:
- New-onset heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) necessitates etiological diagnosis.
- Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) can identify causes of HFrEF, but invasive coronary angiography (CATH) is standard for diagnosing ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM).
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare a CMR-first strategy versus a CATH-first strategy for diagnosing ICM in new-onset HFrEF.
- To assess the potential reduction in invasive procedures using a CMR-first approach.
Main Methods:
- A multicenter, randomized trial involving 229 adults with new-onset HFrEF.
- Patients were assigned to undergo either CMR or CATH as the initial diagnostic modality, followed by the other.
- Expert panels evaluated both modalities blinded to results; the cardiologist-in-charge served as the reference standard.
Main Results:
- CATH was deemed sufficient for ICM diagnosis in 100% of cases, compared to 80% for CMR (P < 0.001).
- Both modalities demonstrated high sensitivity for ICM (CATH 91%, CMR 90%), but CMR had lower specificity (74% vs. 98% for CATH).
- A CMR-first strategy could have potentially avoided 45-48% of CATH procedures.
Conclusions:
- While CATH is superior for ICM diagnosis, CMR offers comparable sensitivity and can significantly decrease the need for invasive angiography.
- A CMR-first strategy may reduce invasive procedures without compromising the detection of critical coronary interventions.
Background:
New-onset heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) requires further diagnostic evaluation to determine its underlying cause. Despite the potential of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging to identify ischemic and nonischemic causes, percutaneous invasive coronary angiography (CATH) remains the preferred tool for diagnosing ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM).
Objectives:
This study aimed to determine whether a CMR-first strategy could diagnose ICM as effectively as CATH (primary endpoint) and potentially reduce the number of invasive procedures (secondary endpoint).
Methods:
In this multicenter 2-armed diagnostic trial (Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Invasive Coronary Angiography as First-Line Diagnostic Modality in New-Onset Heart Failure), 229 adults with new-onset HFrEF were randomized to undergo CMR or CATH first and the other modality second. Separate expert panels evaluated both modalities, blinded to each other's results. The cardiologist-in-charge was blinded to the panel results and served as the reference standard.
Results:
A total of 203 patients (mean age: 62 ± 14 years, 28% women) had evaluable pairs of diagnostic modalities (108 CATH-first). For diagnosing ICM, the panels considered CATH to be sufficient in 100% (105/105) and CMR in 80% (76/95; P < 0.001). Compared with the reference, sensitivity for diagnosing ICM was high for both (CATH 91%, CMR 90%; P = 1.00), but CMR had lower specificity (98% vs 74%; P < 0.001). According to the CMR panel, 48% (46/95) of CATH procedures could have been avoided with a CMR-first strategy, dropping to 45% when excluding patients who underwent coronary interventions.
Conclusions:
Although CATH was superior for diagnosing ICM, CMR showed similar sensitivity and could significantly reduce CATH procedures without increasing the risk of missing critical coronary interventions. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess whether a CMR-first strategy confers prognostic benefit. (Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Invasive Coronary Angiography as First-Line Diagnostic Modality in New-Onset Heart Failure; ISRCTN16515058).
More Related Videos
11:13Quantification of Mouse Heart Left Ventricular Function, Myocardial Strain, and Hemodynamic Forces by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Published on: May 24, 2021
12:24Noninvasive Assessment of Cardiac Abnormalities in Experimental Autoimmune Myocarditis by Magnetic Resonance Microscopy Imaging in the Mouse
Published on: June 20, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System IV: CMRI
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Heart Failure Drugs: Inhibitors of Renin-Angiotensin System
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview