Authors:
Judit Simon MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary
Medical Imaging Centre, Semmelweis University, 2 Korányi Sándor Street, 1083, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Judit Simon in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Szilvia Herczeg Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 68 Városmajor Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Szilvia Herczeg in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Sarolta Borzsák MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Sarolta Borzsák in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Judit Csőre MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Judit Csőre in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Anna Sára Kardos Medical Imaging Centre, Semmelweis University, 2 Korányi Sándor Street, 1083, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Anna Sára Kardos in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Gergely Mérges Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 68 Városmajor Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Gergely Mérges in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Emese Zsarnóczay MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary
Medical Imaging Centre, Semmelweis University, 2 Korányi Sándor Street, 1083, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Emese Zsarnóczay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Nándor Szegedi Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 68 Városmajor Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Nándor Szegedi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Melinda Boussoussou MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Melinda Boussoussou in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Borbála Vattay MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Borbála Vattay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Márton Kolossváry MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Márton Kolossváry in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Bálint Szilveszter MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Bálint Szilveszter in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
László Gellér Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 68 Városmajor Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by László Gellér in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Béla Merkely MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Béla Merkely in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Pál Maurovich-Horvat MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, 18 Határőr Street, 1122, Budapest, Hungary
Medical Imaging Centre, Semmelweis University, 2 Korányi Sándor Street, 1083, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Pál Maurovich-Horvat in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0885-736X
Open access

Abstract

Background and aim

To assess the prevalence of incidental extracardiac findings in patients who underwent cardiac CT for the evaluation of left atrial (LA) anatomy before atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation. We also aimed to determine the independent predictors of relevant extracardiac alterations.

Patients and methods

We studied consecutive patients who underwent cardiac CT with a 256-slice scanner for the visualization of LA anatomy before AF ablation. Prevalence of clinically significant and not significant extracardiac findings were recorded. Moreover, we determined the variables associated with relevant extracardiac alterations with uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

In total, 1,952 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac CT examination between 2010 and 2020 were included in our study (mean age 61.2 ± 10.6 years; 66.2% male). Incidental extracardiac findings were detected in 820 (42.0%; 95%CI = 0.40–0.44%) patients, while clinically significant alterations were reported in 416 (21.3%; 95%CI = 20.0–23.2%) patients. When analyzing the predictors of clinically relevant alterations, age (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.03–1.05), male sex (OR = 1.39; 95%CI = 1.12–1.73), chest pain (OR = 1.46; 95%CI = 1.09–1.93), hypertension (OR = 1.42; 95%CI = 1.12–1.81), heart failure (OR = 1.68; 95%CI = 1.09–2.53), obstructive CAD (OR = 1.56; 95%CI = 1.16–2.09) and prior stroke/TIA (OR = 1.56; 95%CI = 1.04–2.30) showed association with clinically significant incidental findings in the univariate analysis (all P < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, age (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.02–1.06; P < 0.001) proved to be the only significant predictor of clinically relevant extracardiac finding.

Conclusion

Cardiac CT performed before AF ablation is not only helpful in understanding LA anatomy, but might also identify clinically significant pathologies. These incidental findings might have further diagnostic or therapeutic consequences.

Abstract

Background and aim

To assess the prevalence of incidental extracardiac findings in patients who underwent cardiac CT for the evaluation of left atrial (LA) anatomy before atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation. We also aimed to determine the independent predictors of relevant extracardiac alterations.

Patients and methods

We studied consecutive patients who underwent cardiac CT with a 256-slice scanner for the visualization of LA anatomy before AF ablation. Prevalence of clinically significant and not significant extracardiac findings were recorded. Moreover, we determined the variables associated with relevant extracardiac alterations with uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

In total, 1,952 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac CT examination between 2010 and 2020 were included in our study (mean age 61.2 ± 10.6 years; 66.2% male). Incidental extracardiac findings were detected in 820 (42.0%; 95%CI = 0.40–0.44%) patients, while clinically significant alterations were reported in 416 (21.3%; 95%CI = 20.0–23.2%) patients. When analyzing the predictors of clinically relevant alterations, age (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.03–1.05), male sex (OR = 1.39; 95%CI = 1.12–1.73), chest pain (OR = 1.46; 95%CI = 1.09–1.93), hypertension (OR = 1.42; 95%CI = 1.12–1.81), heart failure (OR = 1.68; 95%CI = 1.09–2.53), obstructive CAD (OR = 1.56; 95%CI = 1.16–2.09) and prior stroke/TIA (OR = 1.56; 95%CI = 1.04–2.30) showed association with clinically significant incidental findings in the univariate analysis (all P < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, age (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.02–1.06; P < 0.001) proved to be the only significant predictor of clinically relevant extracardiac finding.

Conclusion

Cardiac CT performed before AF ablation is not only helpful in understanding LA anatomy, but might also identify clinically significant pathologies. These incidental findings might have further diagnostic or therapeutic consequences.

Introduction

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia [1]. Catheter ablation has become a well-established therapeutic approach for the prevention of AF recurrences [1]. Cardiac computed tomography (CT) is frequently performed before catheter ablation to assess the anatomy of the left atrium (LA) and pulmonary veins (PVs) for preprocedural planning and to help precise intraprocedural catheter navigation [2–6]. As compared to other imaging modalities, cardiac CT not only proved to have better diagnostic value in the assessment of LA and PV anatomy, but it is better tolerated, cheaper and faster [7, 8]. Moreover, the evolution of the CT scanners allows better spatial and temporal resolution even at lower radiation exposures [9]. Therefore, cardiac CT is considered as the gold standard for the visualization of LA and PV anatomy prior to AF ablation. The analysis of extracardiac structures may identify incidental findings, defined as unsuspected findings, and some of these might be clinically relevant, or can even reveal malignant disease at a subclinical stage [10]. Prior studies have shown that incidental extracardiac findings are frequently detected in preablation cardiac CT scans [11–20]. However, these studies included smaller patient populations. Moreover, it is controversial whether reading cardiac CT for extracardiac findings is necessary. While some authors recommend reporting alterations of the adjacent structures in order not to miss important findings, others worry about the additional cost and radiation exposure, which might be unnecessary without proven benefit [21–25]. Even if pulmonary nodules are by far the most frequent extracardiac collateral findings, the vast majority of them is benign [26].

Therefore, we aimed to describe and quantify the spectrum of extracardiac incidental findings in patients who underwent ECG-gated cardiac CT before AF catheter ablation. Our secondary aim was to identify clinically significant findings, which lead to a change in patient management. In addition, we aimed to study confounders associated with the detection of clinically relevant incidental extracardiac findings.

Patients and methods

study population

We retrospectively included patients who underwent cardiac CT with a 256-slice CT scanner to assess LA and PV anatomy before first catheter ablation for AF at our centre between 2010 and 2020. Flowchart of the excluded patients is reported in Fig. 1. Preablation anthropometric and clinical data were reported in a structured reporting platform (Axis, Neumann Medical Ltd, Budapest, Hungary). Clinical characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors were obtained from medical reports. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board (SE RKEB 142/2019) and was in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Institutional Guidelines.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Flowchart of the excluded patients

Citation: Imaging 14, 1; 10.1556/1647.2022.00057

Cardiac CT acquisition

Cardiac CT examinations were performed with a 256-slice scanner (Brilliance iCT 256, Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands) or 280-slice scanner (GE Cardiographe, GE Healthcare, Boston, USA) with prospective ECG-triggered axial acquisition mode with 100–120 kV and 200–300 mAs tube current depending on patient anthropometrics. Field of view ranged between 190 and 320 mm Image acquisition was performed with 128 × 0.625 mm detector collimation, and 270 msec gantry rotation time. For heart rate control, a maximum of 50–100 mg metoprolol was given orally and 5–20 mg intravenously, if necessary. In patients with a heart rate of <80/min−1, mid-diastolic triggering was applied with 3–5% padding (73–83% of the R-R interval), and in those with ≥80/min−1, systolic triggering was chosen (35–45% of the R-R interval). Iomeprol contrast material (Iomeron 400, Bracco Ltd, Milan, Italy) was used with 85–95 ml contrast agent at a flow rate of 4.5–5.5 ml s−1 from antecubital vein access via 18-gauge catheter using a four-phasic protocol [27]. Bolus tracking in the LA was used to obtain proper scan timing. Non-contrast data sets were reconstructed with a slice thickness and increment of 2.5 mm, while cardiac CT data sets were reconstructed with 0.8 mm slice thickness and 0.4 mm increment.

Assessment of extracardiac findings

All images were analyzed using a commercially available software (Comprehensive Cardiac Analysis, Philips IntelliSpace Portal, Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands). Images were displayed in the original two-dimensional format in the mediastinal windows, as well as in the two-dimensional multiplanar and three-dimensional reconstruction views. Extracardiac findings were validated by 15 radiologists using cardiac, mediastinal, lung, bone and liver windows.

Incidental extracardiac findings were defined as any unsuspected abnormality depicted outside of the pericardium. The following CT findings were reported: pattern of pulmonary parenchymal abnormalities (nodules, air-space opacities, ground-glass attenuation, emphysema), mediastinal lymph node enlargement, aortic aneurysm, pleural effusion, diaphragmatic hernia, degenerative spine disease. Findings of the upper abdominal region, such as the liver, were also reported. Clinically relevant or potentially relevant incidental findings included alterations requiring further examination or follow-up to confirm the diagnosis. These alterations included lung nodules over 6 mm, air-space opacity, ground-glass attenuation, moderate or severe emphysema, aortic aneurysm (defined as aortic dilatation over 40 mm), enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes over 10 mm, pleural effusion, diaphragmatic hernia over 20 mm, and moderate or severe degenerative spine disease. Non-significant findings included small linear lung opacities, small (less than 6 mm) or calcified nodules, mediastinal lymph nodes less than 10 mm and pleural thickening. This classification is based on the one applied by Sohns C et al. [16] Entirely normal CT scans were also noted.

Statistical analysis

All continuous variables are reported as mean ± standard deviation or numbers and proportions. Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Due to the very low proportions, CIs were calculated based on Wilson’s formula. Thus, better coverage could be obtained as compared to normal approximations [28]. We examined the association of clinically relevant collateral extracardiac findings with potential confounders using uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses. In the multivariate analysis adjustment was made for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), type of AF, smoking status chest pain, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), valve disease, cardiomyopathy, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), thromboembolic disease, peripheral vasculopathy, thyroid gland disease or chronic kidney disease. Data regarding smoking status were missing in 325 (16.6%) patients; therefore multivariate analyses were performed in the remaining 1,627 patients. Statistical analysis was performed in R environment (version 4.0.2). All P values were two-sided and statistical significance was established at P < 0.050.

Results

Study population and prevalence of extracardiac findings

Altogether 1,952 patients were included in our analysis (mean age was 61.2 ± 10.6 years and 66.2% were male). Detailed demographic and clinical characteristics of the included patients are reported in Table 1. Total mean dose length product was 319.1 ± 110.1 mGy x cm. Overall, incidental extracardiac findings were detected in 820 (42.0%; 95%CI = 0.40–0.44%) patients. Clinically significant alterations were reported in 416 (21.3%; 95%CI = 20.0–23.2%) and non-relevant findings were depicted in 658 (33.7%; 95%CI = 31.7–35.8%) patients. Extracardiac alterations affecting the lungs and pleura were the most common incidental findings. Lung nodules over 6 mm were detected in 62 cases (3.2%; 95%CI = 2.5–4.1%), air-space opacities in 3 cases (0.2%; 95%CI = 0.0–0.5%), ground-glass opacities in 31 cases (1.6%; 95%CI = 1.1–2.3%), moderate or severe emphysema in 122 cases (6.3%; 95%CI = 5.3–7.4%), moderate or severe athelectasia in 12 cases (0.6%; 95%CI = 0.3–1.1%). Aorta aneurysm over 40 mm was discovered in 16 cases (0.8%; 95%CI = 0.5–1.3%). Lymph nodes in the mediastinum over 10 mm were identified in 50 cases (2.6%; 95%CI = 2.0–3.4%). Pleura effusion was diagnosed in 13 cases (0.7%; 95%CI = 0.4–1.1%). Diaphragmatic hernia over 20 mm was described in 80 cases (4.1%; 95%CI = 3.3–5.1%). Moderate or severe degenerative disease in the spine was found in 27 patients (1.4%; 95%CI = 1.0–2.0%). Detailed results on incidental extracardiac findings by the affected organ can be seen in Table 2. Representative examples of incidental extracardiac findings showed in Figs 24.

Table 1.

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the patient population

Patients (n = 1,952)
Age (years) 61.2 ± 10.6
Male sex, n (%) 1,292 (66.2)
Type of AF
Paroxysmal, n (%) 1,324 (68.0)
Persistent, n (%) 625 (32.0)
Chest pain, n (%) 275 (14.1)
BMI (kg m−2) 28.7 ± 4.9
Hypertension, n (%) 1,365 (69.9)
Hyperlipidemia, n (%) 514 (26.3)
Diabetes, n (%) 313 (16.0)
Smokers, n (%)* 499 (30.7)
Heart failure, n (%) 106 (5.4)
Obstructive CAD, n (%) 247 (12.7)
Valve disease, n (%) 113 (5.8)
Cardiomyopathy, n (%) 94 (4.8)
Dilatative cardiomyopathy, n (%) 81 (4.1)
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, n (%) 10 (0.5)
Hypertensive cardiomyopathy, n (%) 3 (0.2)
Prior stroke/TIA, n (%) 124 (6.4)
Thromboembolic disease, n (%) 35 (1.8)
Peripheral vasculopathy, n (%) 59 (3.0)
Thyroid gland disease, n (%) 194 (10.0)
Hypothyreosis, n (%) 126 (6.5)
Hyperthyreosis, n (%) 68 (3.5)
Chronic kidney disease, n (%) 60 (3.1)
LVEF (%) 57.2 ± 15.5
CHA2DS2-VASc score
0 260 (13.3)
1–3 1,345 (68.9)
4–6 335 (17.2)
7–9 12 (0.6)

*Data regarding smoking status was available in 1,627 patients. Abbreviations: AF = Atrial fibrillation; BMI = Body mass index; CAD = Coronary artery disease; LVEF = Left ventricular ejection fraction, TIA = Transient ischemic attack.

Table 2.

Incidental extracardiac findings by the affected organ

Extracardiac findings n Prevalence 95%CI
Clinically relevant extracardiac incidental findings
Lungs
Nodules over 6 mm 62 3.2% 2.5–4.1%
Air-space opacities 3 0.2% 0.0–0.5%
Ground-glass opacities 31 1.6% 1.1–2.3%
Moderate or severe emphysema 122 6.3% 5.3–7.4%
Moderate or severe atelectasia 12 0.6% 0.3–1.1%
Aorta
Aneurysm over 40 mm 16 0.8% 0.5–1.3%
Mediastinum
Lymph nodes over 10 mm 50 2.6% 2.0–3.4%
Pleura
Effusion 13 0.7% 0.4–1.1%
Diaphragma
Hernia over 20 mm 80 4.1% 3.3–5.1%
Spine
Moderate or severe degenerative disease 27 1.4% 1.0–2.0%
Number of patients with clinically relevant extracardiac finding 416 21.3% 20.0–23.2%
Clinically not relevant extracardiac incidental findings
Lungs
Nodules less than 6 mm 190 9.7% 8.5–11.1%
Small linear lung opacities 315 16.1% 14.6–17.8%
Mild emphysema 352 18.0% 16.4–19.8%
Pleura
Thickening 20 1.0% 0.7–1.6%
Aorta
Ectasia 9 0.5% 0.2–0.9%
Spine
Mild degenerative disease 82 4.2% 3.4–5.2%
Rib
Lesion 4 0.2% 0.1–0.5%
Liver
Cyst 85 4.4% 3.5–5.4%
Steatosis 7 0.4% 0.2–0.7%
Number of patients with clinically not relevant extracardiac finding 658 33.7% 31.7–35.8%
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Hiatal hernia. 65-year-old male patient with observed hiatal hernia above the diaphragma. His past medical history included controlled hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation since 2018

Citation: Imaging 14, 1; 10.1556/1647.2022.00057

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

Subpleural lung nodule. 51-year-old male with the history of controlled hypertension and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation since 2013. The CT scan showed a 7 mm, polygonal, residual-like, subpleural nodule presented in the left 5th segment of the lung

Citation: Imaging 14, 1; 10.1556/1647.2022.00057

Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

Hypodens liver cysts. 74-year-old female patient. Her medical history included controlled hypertension, euthyroid struma, hysterectomy, and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The CT scan showed several cysts with well-defined margins demonstrated in both lobes of the liver

Citation: Imaging 14, 1; 10.1556/1647.2022.00057

Predictors of clinically relevant extracardiac findings

We aimed to determine the predictors of clinically relevant extracardiac findings. In the univariate analysis age (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.03–1.05; P < 0.001), male sex (OR = 1.39; 95%CI = 1.12–1.73, P = 0.003), chest pain (OR = 1.46; 95%CI = 1.09–1.93; P = 0.009), hypertension (OR = 1.42; 95%CI = 1.12–1.81; P = 0.004), heart failure (OR = 1.68; 95%CI = 1.09–2.53; P = 0.015), obstructive CAD (OR = 1.56; 95%CI = 1.16–2.09, P = 0.003) and prior stroke/TIA (OR = 1.56; 95%CI = 1.04–2.30; P = 0.027) were associated with clinically significant incidental findings. In the multivariate model age (OR = 1.04; 95%CI = 1.02–1.06; P < 0.001) proved to be the only independent predictor of clinically relevant extracardiac alterations. Detailed results are reported in Table 3.

Table 3.

Predictors of clinically relevant extracardiac findings

Univariate Multivariate
OR (95%CI) P OR (95%CI) P
Age 1.04 (1.03–1.05) <0.001 1.04 (1.02–1.06) <0.001
Male sex 1.39 (1.12–1.73) 0.003 1.18 (0.86–1.62) 0.306
BMI 1.01 (0.98–1.04) 0.625 1.01 (0.98–1.04) 0.507
Persistent AF 1.15 (0.92–1.44) 0.214 1.06 (0.76–1.46) 0.727
Smokers 1.20 (0.94–1.53) 0.141 1.09 (0.78–1.51) 0.595
Chest pain 1.46 (1.09–1.93) 0.009 1.37 (0.95–1.96) 0.087
Hypertension 1.42 (1.12–1.81) 0.004 1.15 (0.80–1.67) 0.441
Hyperlipidemia 0.99 (0.78–1.26) 0.947 0.84 (0.59–1.18) 0.326
Diabetes 0.98 (0.73–1.30) 0.907 0.96 (0.64–1.42) 0.838
Heart failure 1.68 (1.09–2.53) 0.015 0.58 (0.21–1.37) 0.241
Obstructive CAD 1.56 (1.16–2.09) 0.003 1.19 (0.77–1.81) 0.426
Valve disease 1.15 (0.73–1.75) 0.533 1.20 (0.58–2.32) 0.606
Cardiomyopathy 1.47 (0.92–2.30) 0.097 1.58 (0.60–3.88) 0.335
Prior stroke/TIA 1.56 (1.04–2.30) 0.027 1.39 (0.79–2.38) 0.242
Thromboembolic disease 1.15 (0.50–2.37) 0.729 0.83 (0.27–2.17) 0.728
Peripheral vasculopathy 1.47 (0.82–2.54) 0.183 1.71 (0.73–3.79) 0.195
Thyroid gland disease 1.26 (0.90–1.76) 0.173 1.02 (0.63–1.62) 0.923
Chronic kidney disease 1.55 (0.87–2.66) 0.120 1.10 (0.48–2.32) 0.819

Abbreviations: AF = Atrial fibrillation; BMI = Body mass index; CAD = Coronary artery disease; LVEF = Left ventricular ejection fraction, TIA = Transient ischemic attack.

Discussion

In the current study, 42.0% of patients who underwent cardiac CT before AF ablation had at least one incidental extracardiac finding and clinically significant alterations were reported in half of these cases. We demonstrated that only age was an independent predictor of clinically relevant extracardiac findings.

Cardiac CT is the gold standard for the precise visualization of the vascular and cardiac anatomy before AF catheter ablation [8]. However, based on previous reports, extracardiac findings were reported in 23–72% of the cases and 16–33% of the patients had clinically relevant extracardiac alterations [15–20]. Wissner et al. reported the prevalence of extracardiac collateral findings in 95 patients who underwent cardiac CT with a 16-slice and subsequently 64-slice CT scanner from 2003 to 2007 [15]. In their study, a total of 78 extracardiac findings were reported in 53% of the patients, among which 23 required additional tests. In 2011, a study of 158 patients undergoing preablation cardiac CT with a 64-slice scanner reported that 72% of the patients had at least one unsuspected extracardiac finding, of whom 31% had clinically significant alterations [16]. The same study group reported the incidence of cardiac and extracardiac collateral findings in 224 patients before AF catheter ablation [17]. This study was also based on a 64-slice CT scanner. In this study, at least one extracardiac finding was observed in 80% of the patients and 32% of the participants had clinically relevant extracardiac collateral findings. Similarly to these results, in a study population of 149 AF patients who underwent cardiac CT with a 16-slice scanner, the prevalence of overall extracardiac findings was 69% and 24% of the patients had at least one clinically significant finding [18]. Lower prevalence was reported in the analysis of 250 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac CT with a 64- slice scanner led by Martins et al. [19]. Only 23% of the patients had extracardiac collateral findings and 0.8% of the cases had malignancy. Casella et al. reported a prevalence of 55% overall and 33% clinically relevant extracardiac alterations in 173 patients who underwent CT examination with a 64-slice scanner before catheter ablation [20]. However, all these above-mentioned studies investigated prevalence in relatively low patient populations and with 16- or 64-slice CT scanners, while in our study we analyzed data of 1,952 patients who underwent cardiac CT with state-of-the-art 256-slice CT scanner. In our study population, 42% of the patients had at least one collateral extracardiac finding and 21% had clinically significant alterations. In the unadjusted analysis beyond age, male sex and chest pain, some comorbidities such as hypertension, obstructive CAD and prior stroke/TIA showed an association with at least one clinically relevant extracardiac finding. In the multivariate analysis, age proved to be the only independent predictor.

Findings affecting the lungs were the most common extracardiac unsuspected alterations. In these cases further diagnostic workup is essential for detecting early lung cancer, even if prior studies have shown that 96.4% of the lung nodules are false positive findings [26]. In order to reduce unnecessary downstream testing, in 2017 the Fleischner Society has adjusted its guidelines for the management of incidental pulmonary nodules on CT images [29]. Compared to their previous guidelines, the minimum threshold size for routine follow-up has been increased and recommended follow-up intervals have been added. The guideline provides a simplified approach for the investigation of various nodules.

Even if many previous studies concluded that preablation cardiac CT images should be read thoroughly as they may serve as a screening tool for otherwise unrecognized alterations of the visualized organs without extra radiation, others worry about the initiation of unnecessary downstream testing without proven benefit resulting in additional costs and radiation exposure [24, 25]. However, with technical evolution modern scanners can obtain high-quality images with lower radiation exposures even in patients with AF. The Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography recommends that all structures within the reconstructed field of view should be examined and alterations should be reported with further reconstructions and expert consultations if needed [30].

Study strengths and limitations

To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study investigating the prevalence of extracardiac findings in a cohort of 1,952 patients who underwent cardiac CT due to planned AF ablation. Moreover, detailed clinical data is available in our study population. However, there are some limitations that need to be acknowledged. First, extracardiac findings were collected from the medical reports without the rereading of the scans. However, in controversial cases when clinical significance was not evident, two radiologist experts (S.B. and J.Cs.) reanalyzed the cases. Second, there is a lack of a clear classification of what should be considered as a clinically relevant finding. We adopted the definitions from Sohns et al., as they previously reported two studies with relatively big patient numbers [16, 17]. Therefore, we could compare our results with previous findings more precisely. Moreover, 16.6% of the cases were not included in the multivariate analysis due to lack of data regarding smoking status. Furthermore, the non-randomized design of the study might lead to selection bias.

To our knowledge, this is the largest study to evaluate the prevalence of incidental extracardiac findings in patients undergoing cardiac CT due to planned AF ablation procedure. Cardiac CT images acquired before AF catheter ablation should be read thoroughly as they can provide otherwise unrecognized, clinically significant information in the depicted field of view.

Funding sources

Project no. NVKP_16-1–2016-0017 (‘National Heart Program’) has been implemented with the support provided from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund of Hungary, financed under the NVKP_16 funding scheme. The research was financed by the Thematic Excellence Programme (2020-4.1.1.-TKP2020) of the Ministry for Innovation and Technology in Hungary, within the framework of the Therapeutic Development and Bioimaging thematic programmes of the Semmelweis University. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Authors’ contribution

All authors contributed to the study conception, writing and revision of the manuscript. A.S.K., G.M., E.Zs., M.B., B.V. contributed to data curation and analysis. Radiologist experts who reanalyze the controversial cases: S.B., J.Cs. Design and writing of the manuscript were done by J.S., Sz.H., S.B., L.G., B.Sz., N.Sz. Proofreading and critical revision of the manuscript were performed by M.K., B.M., P.M.H. All authors reviewed the final version of the manuscript and agreed to submit it to IMAGING for publication.

Conflict of interests

One of the co-authors, Dr. Béla Merkely, is the Chair of the Editorial Board, the corresponding author, Dr. Pál Maurovich-Horvát is the Editor-in-Chief of IMAGING, therefore the submission was handled by a different member of the editorial team.

Abbreviations

AF

Atrial fibrillation

BMI

Body mass index

CAD

Coronary artery disease

LA

Left atrium

LVEF

Left ventricular ejection fraction

PV

Pulmonary vein

TIA

Transient ischemic attack

References

  • [1]

    Hindricks G , Potpara T , Dagres N , Arbelo E , Bax J.J , Blomstrom-Lundqvist C , et al.: 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2021; 42(5): 373498.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    Sra J : Cardiac image integration implications for atrial fibrillation ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2008; 22(2): 145154.

  • [3]

    Dong J , Dickfeld T , Dalal D , Cheema A , Vasamreddy C.R , Henrikson C.A , et al.: Initial experience in the use of integrated electroanatomic mapping with three-dimensional MR/CT images to guide catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006; 17(5): 459466.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    Bertaglia E , Bella P.D , Tondo C , Proclemer A , Bottoni N , De Ponti R , et al.: Image integration increases efficacy of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: results from the CartoMerge Italian registry. Europace 2009; 11(8): 10041010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    Kottkamp H , Piorkowski C , Tanner H , Kobza R , Dorszewski A , Schirdewahn P , et al.: Topographic variability of the esophageal left atrial relation influencing ablation lines in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2005; 16(2): 146150.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [6]

    Martinek M , Nesser H.J , Aichinger J , Boehm G , Purerfellner H : Impact of integration of multislice computed tomography imaging into three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping on clinical outcomes, safety, and efficacy using radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007; 30(10): 12151223.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [7]

    Jongbloed M.R , Bax J.J , Lamb H.J , Dirksen M.S , Zeppenfeld K , van der Wall E.E , et al.: Multislice computed tomography versus intracardiac echocardiography to evaluate the pulmonary veins before radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a head-to-head comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 45(3): p. 343350.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [8]

    Lacomis J.M , Pealer K , Fuhrman C.R , Barley D , Wigginton W , Schwartzman D : Direct comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for characterization of posterior left atrial morphology. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2006; 16(1): 713.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    Investigators S.-H : CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (SCOT-HEART): an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre trial. Lancet 2015; 385(9985): 23832391.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    Koonce J , Schoepf J.U , Nguyen S.A , Northam M.C , Ravenel J.G : Extra-cardiac findings at cardiac CT: experience with 1,764 patients. Eur Radiol 2009; 19(3): 570576.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [11]

    Elgin E.E , O’Malley P.G , Feuerstein I , Taylor A.J : Frequency and severity of “incidentalomas” encountered during electron beam computed tomography for coronary calcium in middle-aged army personnel. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90(5): 543545.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    Horton K.M , Post W.S , Blumenthal R.S , Fishman E.K : Prevalence of significant noncardiac findings on electron-beam computed tomography coronary artery calcium screening examinations. Circulation 2002; 106(5): 532534.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [13]

    Hunold P , Schmermund A , Seibel R.M , Gronemeyer D.H , Erbel R : Prevalence and clinical significance of accidental findings in electron-beam tomographic scans for coronary artery calcification. Eur Heart J 2001; 22(18): 17481758.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [14]

    Schragin J.G , Weissfeld J.L , Edmundowicz D , Strollo D.C , Fuhrman C.R : Non-cardiac findings on coronary electron beam computed tomography scanning. J Thorac Imaging 2004; 19(2): 8286.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    Wissner E , Wellnitz C.V , Srivathsan K , Scott L.R , Altemose G.T : Value of multislice computed tomography angiography of the thorax in preparation for catheter ablation for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: the impact of unexpected cardiac and extracardiac findings on patient care. Eur J Radiol 2009; 72(2): 284288.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    Sohns C , Sossalla S , Vollmann D , Luethje L , Seegers J , Schmitto J.D , et al.: Extra cardiac findings by 64-multidetector computed tomography in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation prior to pulmonal vein isolation. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011; 27(1): 127134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [17]

    Sohns J.M , Menke J , Staab W , Spiro J , Fasshauer M , Kowallick J.T , et al.: Current role of cardiac and extra-cardiac pathologies in clinically indicated cardiac computed tomography with emphasis on status before pulmonary vein isolation. Rofo 2014; 186(9): 860867.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    Schietinger B.J , Bozlar U , Hagspiel K.D , Norton P.T , Greenbaum H.R , Wang H , et al.: The prevalence of extracardiac findings by multidetector computed tomography before atrial fibrillation ablation. Am Heart J 2008; 155(2): 254259.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [19]

    Martins R.P , Muresan L , Sellal J.M , Mandry D , Regent D , Jarmouni S , et al.: Incidental extracardiac findings in cardiac computed tomography performed before radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2011; 34(12): 16651670.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [20]

    Casella M , Perna F , Pontone G , Dello Russo A , Andreini D , Pelargonio G , et al.: Prevalence and clinical significance of collateral findings detected by chest computed tomography in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation. Europace 2012; 14(2): 209216.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    Kalra M.K , Abbara S , Cury R.C , Brady T.J : Interpretation of incidental findings on cardiac CT angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2007; 70(2): 324325. author reply 326- 8.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [22]

    Torres F.S : Extracardiac findings in cardiac CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202(4): W411.

  • [23]

    Kim, J.W , Kang E.Y , Yong H.S , Kim Y.K , Woo O.H , Oh Y.W , et al.: Incidental extracardiac findings at cardiac CT angiography: Comparison of prevalence and clinical significance between precontrast low-dose whole thoracic scan and postcontrast retrospective ECG-gated cardiac scan. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 25(Suppl 1): 7581.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [24]

    Budoff M.J , Fischer H , Gopal A : Incidental findings with cardiac CT evaluation: should we read beyond the heart? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2006; 68(6): 965973.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [25]

    Budoff M.J , Gopal A : Incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography. Should we look? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2007; 1(2): 97105.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [26]

    National Lung Screening Trial Research, T , Aberle D.R , Adams A.M , Berg C.D , Black W.C , Clapp J.D , et al.: Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365(5): 395409.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [27]

    Karady J , Panajotu A , Kolossvary M , Szilveszter B , Jermendy A.L , Bartykowszki A , et al.: The effect of four-phasic versus three-phasic contrast media injection protocols on extravasation rate in coronary CT angiography: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Radiol 2017; 27(11): 45384543.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [28]

    Tsai W.Y , Chi Y , Chen C.M : Interval estimation of binomial proportion in clinical trials with a two-stage design. Stat Med 2008; 27(1): 1535.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [29]

    MacMahon H , Naidich D.P , Goo J.M , Lee K.S , Leung A.N.C , Mayo J.R , et al.: Guidelines for management of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on CT images: from the Fleischner society 2017. Radiology 2017; 284(1): 228243.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [30]

    Leipsic J , Abbara S , Achenbach S , Cury R , Earls J.P , Mancini G.J , et al.: SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary CT angiography: a report of the society of cardiovascular computed tomography guidelines committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2014; 8(5): 342358.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [1]

    Hindricks G , Potpara T , Dagres N , Arbelo E , Bax J.J , Blomstrom-Lundqvist C , et al.: 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2021; 42(5): 373498.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    Sra J : Cardiac image integration implications for atrial fibrillation ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2008; 22(2): 145154.

  • [3]

    Dong J , Dickfeld T , Dalal D , Cheema A , Vasamreddy C.R , Henrikson C.A , et al.: Initial experience in the use of integrated electroanatomic mapping with three-dimensional MR/CT images to guide catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006; 17(5): 459466.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    Bertaglia E , Bella P.D , Tondo C , Proclemer A , Bottoni N , De Ponti R , et al.: Image integration increases efficacy of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: results from the CartoMerge Italian registry. Europace 2009; 11(8): 10041010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    Kottkamp H , Piorkowski C , Tanner H , Kobza R , Dorszewski A , Schirdewahn P , et al.: Topographic variability of the esophageal left atrial relation influencing ablation lines in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2005; 16(2): 146150.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [6]

    Martinek M , Nesser H.J , Aichinger J , Boehm G , Purerfellner H : Impact of integration of multislice computed tomography imaging into three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping on clinical outcomes, safety, and efficacy using radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007; 30(10): 12151223.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [7]

    Jongbloed M.R , Bax J.J , Lamb H.J , Dirksen M.S , Zeppenfeld K , van der Wall E.E , et al.: Multislice computed tomography versus intracardiac echocardiography to evaluate the pulmonary veins before radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a head-to-head comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 45(3): p. 343350.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [8]

    Lacomis J.M , Pealer K , Fuhrman C.R , Barley D , Wigginton W , Schwartzman D : Direct comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for characterization of posterior left atrial morphology. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2006; 16(1): 713.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    Investigators S.-H : CT coronary angiography in patients with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (SCOT-HEART): an open-label, parallel-group, multicentre trial. Lancet 2015; 385(9985): 23832391.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    Koonce J , Schoepf J.U , Nguyen S.A , Northam M.C , Ravenel J.G : Extra-cardiac findings at cardiac CT: experience with 1,764 patients. Eur Radiol 2009; 19(3): 570576.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [11]

    Elgin E.E , O’Malley P.G , Feuerstein I , Taylor A.J : Frequency and severity of “incidentalomas” encountered during electron beam computed tomography for coronary calcium in middle-aged army personnel. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90(5): 543545.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    Horton K.M , Post W.S , Blumenthal R.S , Fishman E.K : Prevalence of significant noncardiac findings on electron-beam computed tomography coronary artery calcium screening examinations. Circulation 2002; 106(5): 532534.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [13]

    Hunold P , Schmermund A , Seibel R.M , Gronemeyer D.H , Erbel R : Prevalence and clinical significance of accidental findings in electron-beam tomographic scans for coronary artery calcification. Eur Heart J 2001; 22(18): 17481758.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [14]

    Schragin J.G , Weissfeld J.L , Edmundowicz D , Strollo D.C , Fuhrman C.R : Non-cardiac findings on coronary electron beam computed tomography scanning. J Thorac Imaging 2004; 19(2): 8286.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    Wissner E , Wellnitz C.V , Srivathsan K , Scott L.R , Altemose G.T : Value of multislice computed tomography angiography of the thorax in preparation for catheter ablation for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: the impact of unexpected cardiac and extracardiac findings on patient care. Eur J Radiol 2009; 72(2): 284288.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    Sohns C , Sossalla S , Vollmann D , Luethje L , Seegers J , Schmitto J.D , et al.: Extra cardiac findings by 64-multidetector computed tomography in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation prior to pulmonal vein isolation. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011; 27(1): 127134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [17]

    Sohns J.M , Menke J , Staab W , Spiro J , Fasshauer M , Kowallick J.T , et al.: Current role of cardiac and extra-cardiac pathologies in clinically indicated cardiac computed tomography with emphasis on status before pulmonary vein isolation. Rofo 2014; 186(9): 860867.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    Schietinger B.J , Bozlar U , Hagspiel K.D , Norton P.T , Greenbaum H.R , Wang H , et al.: The prevalence of extracardiac findings by multidetector computed tomography before atrial fibrillation ablation. Am Heart J 2008; 155(2): 254259.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [19]

    Martins R.P , Muresan L , Sellal J.M , Mandry D , Regent D , Jarmouni S , et al.: Incidental extracardiac findings in cardiac computed tomography performed before radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2011; 34(12): 16651670.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [20]

    Casella M , Perna F , Pontone G , Dello Russo A , Andreini D , Pelargonio G , et al.: Prevalence and clinical significance of collateral findings detected by chest computed tomography in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation. Europace 2012; 14(2): 209216.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    Kalra M.K , Abbara S , Cury R.C , Brady T.J : Interpretation of incidental findings on cardiac CT angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2007; 70(2): 324325. author reply 326- 8.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [22]

    Torres F.S : Extracardiac findings in cardiac CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202(4): W411.

  • [23]

    Kim, J.W , Kang E.Y , Yong H.S , Kim Y.K , Woo O.H , Oh Y.W , et al.: Incidental extracardiac findings at cardiac CT angiography: Comparison of prevalence and clinical significance between precontrast low-dose whole thoracic scan and postcontrast retrospective ECG-gated cardiac scan. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009; 25(Suppl 1): 7581.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [24]

    Budoff M.J , Fischer H , Gopal A : Incidental findings with cardiac CT evaluation: should we read beyond the heart? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2006; 68(6): 965973.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [25]

    Budoff M.J , Gopal A : Incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography. Should we look? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2007; 1(2): 97105.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [26]

    National Lung Screening Trial Research, T , Aberle D.R , Adams A.M , Berg C.D , Black W.C , Clapp J.D , et al.: Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365(5): 395409.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [27]

    Karady J , Panajotu A , Kolossvary M , Szilveszter B , Jermendy A.L , Bartykowszki A , et al.: The effect of four-phasic versus three-phasic contrast media injection protocols on extravasation rate in coronary CT angiography: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Radiol 2017; 27(11): 45384543.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [28]

    Tsai W.Y , Chi Y , Chen C.M : Interval estimation of binomial proportion in clinical trials with a two-stage design. Stat Med 2008; 27(1): 1535.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [29]

    MacMahon H , Naidich D.P , Goo J.M , Lee K.S , Leung A.N.C , Mayo J.R , et al.: Guidelines for management of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on CT images: from the Fleischner society 2017. Radiology 2017; 284(1): 228243.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [30]

    Leipsic J , Abbara S , Achenbach S , Cury R , Earls J.P , Mancini G.J , et al.: SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary CT angiography: a report of the society of cardiovascular computed tomography guidelines committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2014; 8(5): 342358.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Collapse
  • Expand

 

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.
 
The Open Access statement together with the description of the Copyright and License Policy are available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.


 

Chair of the Editorial Board:
Béla MERKELY (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Editor-in-Chief:
Pál MAUROVICH-HORVAT (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Deputy Editor-in-Chief:
Viktor BÉRCZI (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Executive Editor:
Charles S. WHITE (University of Maryland, USA)

Deputy Editors:
Gianluca PONTONE (Department of Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan, Italy)
Michelle WILLIAMS (University of Edinburgh, UK)

Senior Associate Editors:
Tamás Zsigmond KINCSES (University of Szeged, Hungary)
Hildo LAMB (Leiden University, The Netherlands)
Denisa MURARU (Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Milan, Italy)
Ronak RAJANI (Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK)

Associate Editors:
Andrea BAGGIANO (Department of Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan, Italy)
Fabian BAMBERG (Department of Radiology, University Hospital Freiburg, Germany)
Péter BARSI (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Theodora BENEDEK (University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Sciences and Technology, Targu Mures, Romania)
Ronny BÜCHEL (University Hospital Zürich, Switzerland)
Filippo CADEMARTIRI (SDN IRCCS, Naples, Italy) Matteo CAMELI (University of Siena, Italy)
Csilla CELENG (University of Utrecht, The Netherlands)
Edit DÓSA (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Marco FRANCONE (La Sapienza University of Rome, Italy)
Viktor GÁL (OrthoPred Ltd., Győr, Hungary)
Alessia GIMELLI (Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio, Pisa, Italy)
Tamás GYÖRKE (Semmelweis Unversity, Budapest)
Fabian HYAFIL (European Hospital Georges Pompidou, Paris, France)
György JERMENDY (Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Hospital, Budapest, Hungary)
Pál KAPOSI (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Mihaly KÁROLYI (University of Zürich, Switzerland)
Lajos KOZÁK (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Mariusz KRUK (Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw, Poland)
Zsuzsa LÉNARD (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Erica MAFFEI (ASUR Marche, Urbino, Marche, Italy)
Robert MANKA (University Hospital, Zürich, Switzerland)
Saima MUSHTAQ (Cardiology Center Monzino (IRCCS), Milan, Italy)
Gábor RUDAS (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Balázs RUZSICS (Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital, UK)
Christopher L SCHLETT (Unievrsity Hospital Freiburg, Germany)
Bálint SZILVESZTER (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Richard TAKX (University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands)
Ádám TÁRNOKI (National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary)
Dávid TÁRNOKI (National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary)
Ákos VARGA-SZEMES (Medical University of South Carolina, USA)
Hajnalka VÁGÓ (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Jiayin ZHANG (Department of Radiology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China)

International Editorial Board:

Gergely ÁGOSTON (University of Szeged, Hungary)
Anna BARITUSSIO (University of Padova, Italy)
Bostjan BERLOT (University Medical Centre, Ljubljana, Slovenia)
Edoardo CONTE (Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan)
Réka FALUDI (University of Szeged, Hungary)
Andrea Igoren GUARICCI (University of Bari, Italy)
Marco GUGLIELMO (Department of Cardiovascular Imaging, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan, Italy)
Kristóf HISRCHBERG (University of Heidelberg, Germany)
Dénes HORVÁTHY (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Julia KARADY (Harvard Unversity, MA, USA)
Attila KOVÁCS (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Riccardo LIGA (Cardiothoracic and Vascular Department, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italy)
Máté MAGYAR (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Giuseppe MUSCOGIURI (Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan, Italy)
Anikó I NAGY (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Liliána SZABÓ (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
Özge TOK (Memorial Bahcelievler Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey)
Márton TOKODI (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Managing Editor:
Anikó HEGEDÜS (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)

Pál Maurovich-Horvat, MD, PhD, MPH, Editor-in-Chief

Semmelweis University, Medical Imaging Centre
2 Korányi Sándor utca, Budapest, H-1083, Hungary
Tel: +36-20-663-2485
E-mail: maurovich-horvat.pal@med.semmelweis-univ.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • WoS Emerging Science Citation Index
  • Scopus
  • DOAJ

2022  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
65
Journal Impact Factor 0.4
Rank by Impact Factor

n/a

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0.3
5 Year
Impact Factor
0.8
Journal Citation Indicator 0.06
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

Medicine, General & Internal (Q4)

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
18
Scimago
Journal Rank
0.171
Scimago Quartile Score

Medicine (miscellanous) (Q4)
Radiological and Ultrasound Technology (Q4)
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (Q4)

Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1.0
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Medicine (miscellaneous) 221/309 (28th PCTL)
Radiological and Ultrasound Technology 45/58 (23rd PCTL)
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging 242/312 (22nd PCTL)
Scopus
SNIP
0.354

2021  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
56
Journal Impact Factor not applicable
Rank by Impact Factor

not applicable

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
not applicable
5 Year
Impact Factor
not applicable
Journal Citation Indicator 0,10
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

Medicine, General & Internal 236/329

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
16
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,226
Scimago Quartile Score Medicine (miscellaneous) (Q4)
Radiological and Ultrasound Technology (Q4)
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (Q4)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1,6
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Medicine (miscellaneous) 175/276 (Q3)
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging 209/308 (Q3)
Radiological and Ultrasound Technology 42/60 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,451

2020  
CrossRef Documents 7
CrossRef Cites 0
CrossRef H-index 1
Days from submission to acceptance 17
Days from acceptance to publication 70
Acceptance Rate 43%

Imaging
Publication Model Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge none
Subscription Information Gold Open Access

Imaging
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
2020 (2009)
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
2
Founder Akadémiai Kiadó
Founder's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2732-0960 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Sep 2023 0 34 22
Oct 2023 0 29 13
Nov 2023 0 17 4
Dec 2023 0 92 26
Jan 2024 0 82 17
Feb 2024 0 79 14
Mar 2024 0 0 0