Search

Background: Multiple gated acquisition scanning (MUGA) is a common imaging modality for baseline and serial assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) for cardiotoxicity risk assessment prior to, surveillance during, and surveillance after administration of potentially cardiotoxic cancer treatment. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) obtained by contemporary clinical multiple gated acquisition scans (MUGA) with reference LVEFs from cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in consecutive patients with cancer. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, we compared MUGA clinical and CMR reference LVEFs in 75 patients with cancer who had both studies within 30 days. Misclassification was assessed using the two most common thresholds of LVEF used in cardiotoxicity clinical studies and practice: 50 and 55%. Results: Compared to CMR reference LVEFs, MUGA clinical LVEFs were only lower by a mean of 1.5% (48.5% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.17). However, the limits of agreement between MUGA clinical and CMR reference LVEFs were wide at -19.4 to 16. 5%. At LVEF thresholds of 50 and 55%, there was misclassification of 35 and 20% of cancer patients, respectively. Conclusions: MUGA clinical LVEFs are only modestly accurate when compared with CMR reference LVEFs. These data have significant implications on clinical research and patient care of a population with, or at risk for, cardiotoxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Vasospasm and delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) are complications of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) and contribute up to 23% of the disability and deaths from aSAH. The use of intrathecal nicardipine (ITN) as a possible treatment for DCI has been explored with mixed results. We present a retrospective series comparing standard post-aSAH care to standard care plus ITN therapy. The primary objective of this study was to assess for any difference in functional outcome in terms of modified Rankin scale (mRS) score between the standard therapy group and ITN group at discharge and one month after discharge.  Methods The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained for a retrospective chart review of patients with aSAH who were treated at the University of Mississippi Medical Center between January 2012 and June 2019. The inclusion criteria included sufficient available medical documentation, aSAH with documentation of an intracranial aneurysm, and age ≥ 18. The exclusion criteria included non-aSAH, patients with insufficient medical records, and mycotic aneurysms. The decision to treat with ITN was based on the individual practice of a single neuro-intensivist in collaboration with the neurosurgical staff. Results A total of 385 patients were included in the study with 31 patients receiving ITN. Those within the nicardipine group presented with significantly worse Hunt and Hess grades and experienced significantly worse cerebral vasospasm, higher transcranial Doppler (TCD) velocities, higher rates of DCI, and higher rates of hydrocephalus. When controlling for placement of an external ventricular drain, the patients in the ITN group experienced higher rates of ventriculitis (10.0% vs. 2.0%, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hospital stay, mRS at discharge, or mRS at one-month follow-up. Conclusion In our series, ITN therapy did not significantly alter outcomes in terms of mRS at discharge or at one month after discharge. However, there was a significant increase in ventriculitis among patients who received this therapy., Competing Interests: Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. University of Mississippi Medical Center IRB issued approval UMMC-IRB-2023-404. The retrospective chart review of the patients in this study was approved by the University of Mississippi Medical Center IRB. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2024, Smalley et al.)