Description

CMR is an imaging modality used to assess cardiac or vascular anatomy, function, perfusion and tissue characteristics in a single examination. In lesions affecting the right heart, CMR provides excellent visualization and volume determination regardless of RV shape. This is particularly useful in patients with congenital heart disease

CMR safety: Since many cardiac patients have cardiac implanted electrical devices), the risk of CMR to the patient and the device must be weighed against the benefit to the patient, in terms of clinical value in optimal management.

Cardiac magnetic imaging (CMR) is often required when transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) provide inadequate imaging data.

Stress CMR for assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) is performed pharmacologically either as:

• Vasodilator perfusion imaging with gadolinium contrast; OR
• Dobutamine inotropic wall motion (ventriculography).

With respect to CAD evaluation, since CMR is only pharmacologic (non-exercise stress), and stress echocardiography (SE) or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) provide similar information about CAD:

• Requests for stress CMR require diversion to exercise SE first, and to exercise MPI second.
• Exemptions for the diversion to SE or exercise MPI:
  • If body habitus or marked obesity (e.g., BMI ≥ 40) would interfere significantly with imaging with SE and PI
  • Evaluation of young (< 55 years old) patients with documented complex CAD, who are likely to need frequent non-invasive coronary ischemia evaluation and/or frequent radiation exposure from other testing

OVERVIEW
CMR in CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE (CAD)

Stable patients without known CAD fall into two categories:

• Asymptomatic, for whom global risk of CAD events can be determined from coronary risk factors, using calculators available online
• Symptomatic, for whom we estimate the pretest probability that their chest-related symptoms are due to clinically significant (≥ 50%) CAD (below):

The Three Types of Chest Pain or Discomfort

• Typical angina (definite) is defined as including all three characteristics:
  • Substernal chest pain or discomfort with characteristic quality and duration
  • Provoked by exertion or emotional stress
  • Relieved by rest and/or nitroglycerine
• Atypical angina (probable) has only two of the above characteristics.
• Nonanginal chest pain/discomfort has only 0 – 1 of the above characteristics.

Once the type of chest pain has been established from the medical record, the pretest probability of CAD (meaning obstructive CAD defined as coronary arterial narrowing ≥ 50%) is estimated from the Diamond Forrester Table below, recognizing that, in some cases, multiple additional coronary risk factors could increase pretest probability. 

• Very low: < 5% pretest probability of CAD, usually not requiring stress evaluation
• Low: 5 – 10% pretest probability of CAD
• Intermediate: 10% – 90% pretest probability of CAD
• High: > 90% pretest probability of CAD 

Table 17. Suggested Follow-up of Aortic Pathologies After Repair or Treatment 

Abbreviations

General Information
It is an expectation that all patients receive care/services from a licensed clinician. All appropriate supporting documentation, including recent pertinent office visit notes, laboratory data, and results of any special testing must be provided. All prior relevant imaging results and the reason that alternative imaging cannot be performed must be included in the documentation submitted.

Policy
INDICATIONS FOR CARDIAC MAGNETIC RESONANCE (CMR)

Cardiomyopathy and Heart Failure^1,2,3

• To assess systolic and diastolic function in the evaluation of a newly diagnosed cardiomyopathy
• Suspected infiltrative disease such as amyloidosis, sarcoidosis,⁴ hemochromatosis, or endomyocardial fibrosis if PET has not been performed
• Suspected inherited or acquired cardiomyopathy
• Diagnosis of acute myocarditis, with suspicion based upon new, unexplained findings, such as:
  • Rise in troponin not clearly due to acute myocardial infarction
  • Change in ECG suggesting acute myocardial injury or pericarditis, without evident myocardial infarction
• Assessment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy⁵
  • When TTE is inadequate for diagnosis, management or operative planning, or when tissue characterization (degree of fibrosis) will impact indications for ICD
  • For patients with LVH when there is a suspicion of alternative diagnoses, including infiltrative or storage disease as well as athlete’s heart
  • For patients who are not otherwise as high risk for SCD, in whom the decision to proceed with an ICD is uncertain after assessment (which includes personal/family history, echocardiography), and CMR imaging is beneficial to assess for maximum LV wall thickness, ejection fraction (EF), LV apical aneurysm, and extent of myocardial fibrosis with LGE
  • For patients with obstructive HCM in whom the autonomic mechanism of obstruction is inconclusive on echocardiography, CMR is indicated for selection and planning of SRT (septal reduction therapy)
  • For patients with HCM, repeat imaging on a periodic basis (every 3 – 5 years) for the purpose of SCD risk stratification to evaluate changes in LGE, EF, development of apical aneurysm or LV wall thickness
• Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy to aid in identification and diagnosis (assessment of myocardial fat, fibrosis, and RV tissue characteristics), based upon reason for suspicion, such as:
  • Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (VT)
  • Unexplained syncope
  • ECG abnormalities
  • First-degree relatives with positive genotype for ARVD
• Noncompaction cardiomyopathy to aid in the diagnosis (measurement of compacted to noncompacted myocardium) when TTE is suggestive
• Clinical symptoms and signs consistent with a cardiac diagnosis known to cause presyncope/syncope (including, but not limited to, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy)
• Pulmonary hypertension in the absence of severe valvular disease

Valvular Heart Disease

• Evaluation of valvular stenosis, regurgitation, or valvular masses when transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is inadequate⁶
• Pre-TAVR assessment if the patient has not undergone cardiac CT⁷
• Prior to transcatheter mitral valve intervention, when TTE and TEE result in uncertain assessment of the severity of mitral regurgitation^8,9
• Suspected clinically significant bioprosthetic valvular dysfunction and inadequate images from TTE and TEE⁶

Evaluation of Intra- and Extra-Cardiac Structures

• Initial evaluation of cardiac mass, suspected tumor or thrombus, or potential cardiac source of emboli
• Re-evaluation of intracardiac mass when findings would change therapy
• Evaluation of pericardial disease to provide structural and functional assessment and differentiate constrictive vs restrictive physiology
• Assessment of left ventricular pseudoaneurysm, when TTE was inadequate
• Identification and characteristics of coronary aneurysms or anomalous coronary arteries

Pre-procedure Evaluation for Closure of ASD or PFO

• For assessment of atrial septal anatomy and atrial septal aneurysm
• For assessment of suitability for percutaneous device closure

Assessment Following LAA Occlusion

• For surveillance at 45 days or FDA guidance, if TEE or heart CT was not done, to assess:
  • Device stability
  • Device leaks
  • To exclude device migration

Pre-Ablation Planning

• Evaluation of left atrium and pulmonary veins prior to radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation, if cardiac CT has not been done

Aortic Pathology

• CT, MR, or echocardiogram can be used for screening and follow-up, with CT and MR preferred for imaging beyond the proximal ascending thoracic aorta
• Screening of first-degree relatives with a history of thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection
• Six-month follow-up after initial diagnosis of thoracic aortic aneurysm to measure rate of change
• Annual follow-up for an enlarged thoracic aortic aneurysm (usually defined as > 4.4.cm)
• Biannual (2x/year) follow-up of enlarged aortic root or showing growth rate ≥ 0.5 cm/year
• Screening of first-degree relative with a bicuspid aortic valve
• Re-evaluation (< 1 y) of the size and morphology of the aortic sinuses and ascending aorta in patients with a bicuspid AV and an ascending aortic diameter > 4 cm with 1 of the following:
  • Aortic diameter > 4.5 cm
  • Rapid rate of change in aortic diameter
  • Family history (first-degree relative) of aortic dissection
• Patients with Turner’s syndrome annually if an abnormality exists; if initial study normal, can have imaging every 5 – 10 years
• Evaluation in patients with known or suspected connective tissue disease or genetic condition that predispose to aortic aneurysm or dissection, such as Marfan’s, Ehler’s Danlos or Loeys-Dietz syndrome (at the time of diagnosis and 6 months thereafter), followed by annual imaging (can be done more frequently if > 4.5 cm or rate of growth > 0.5 cm/year, up to twice per year)

Congenital Heart Disease (CHD)¹⁰

• For all indications below, either CT or CMR can be done
• All lesions: evaluation prior to planned repair and evaluation for change in clinical status and/or new concerning signs or symptoms
• Patent ductus arteriosus: routine surveillance (1 – 2 years) in a patient with postprocedural aortic obstruction
• Eisenmenger Syndrome and pulmonary hypertension associated with CHD:
  • Evaluation due to change in pulmonary arterial hypertension-targeted therapy
  • Initial evaluation with suspicion of pulmonary hypertension following CHD surgery
• Aortic stenosis or regurgitation:
  • Routine surveillance (6 – 12 months) in a child with aortic sinus and/or ascending aortic dilation with increasing size
  • Routine surveillance (2 – 3 years) in a child with aortic sinus and/or ascending aortic dilation with stable size (CMR only)
• Aortic coarctation and interrupted aortic arch:
  • Routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in a child or adult with mild aortic coarctation
  • Post procedure (surgical or catheter-based) routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in an asymptomatic patient to evaluate for aortic arch aneurysms, in-stent stenosis, stent fracture or endoleak
• Coronary anomalies
• Tetralogy of fallot:
  • Postoperative routine surveillance (2 – 3 years) in a patient with pulmonary regurgitation and preserved ventricular function (CMR only)
  • Routine surveillance (2 – 3 years) in an asymptomatic patient with no or mild sequelae (CMR only)
  • Routine surveillance (2 –3 years) in a patient with valvular or ventricular dysfunction, right ventricular outflow tract obstruction, branch pulmonary artery stenosis, arrhythmias, or presence of an RV-to-PA conduit
• Double outlet right ventricle: routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in an asymptomatic patient with no or mild sequelae (CMR only)
• D-loop transposition of the great arteries (postoperative):
  • Routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in an asymptomatic patient
  • Routine surveillance (1 – 2 years) in a patient with dilated aortic root with increasing size, or aortic regurgitation
  • Routine surveillance (3 – 12 months) in a patient with ≥ moderate systemic AV valve regurgitation, systemic RV dysfunction, LVOT obstruction or arrhythmias
• Congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries:
  • Unrepaired: routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in an asymptomatic patient
  • Postoperative: routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in an asymptomatic patient
  • Postoperative anatomic repair: routine surveillance (6 – 12 months) in a patient with valvular or ventricular dysfunction, right or left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, or presence of an RV-to-PA conduit
  • Postoperative physiological repair with VSD closure and/or LV-to-PA conduit: routine surveillance (3 – 12 months) in a patient with ≥ moderate systemic AV valve regurgitation, systemic RV dysfunction and/or LV-to-PA conduit dysfunction
• Truncus arteriosus: routine surveillance (1 – 2 years) in an asymptomatic child or adult with ≥ moderate truncal stenosis and/or regurgitation
• Single-ventricle heart disease:
  • Postoperative routine surveillance (1 – 2 years) in an asymptomatic patient
  • Routine surveillance (1 – 2 years) in an asymptomatic adult postoperative Stage 2 palliation (CMR only)
• Ebstein’s anomaly and tricuspid valve dysplasia (only CMR indicated):
  • Evaluation prior to planned repair and evaluation for change in clinical status and/or new concerning signs or symptoms
• Pulmonary stenosis (only CMR indicated)
  • Unrepaired: routine surveillance (3 – 5 years) in an asymptomatic adult with PS and pulmonary artery dilation
  • Postprocedural (surgical or catheter-based): routine surveillance (1 – 3 years) in an asymptomatic adult with moderate or severe sequelae
• Pulmonary atresia (postprocedural complete repair): routine surveillance (1 – 3 years) in an asymptomatic adult with ≥ moderate sequelae

Coronary Artery Disease Evaluation (CMR as an Alternative to Pharmacologic MPI)

CMR, which is done pharmacologically, is used for the assessment of coronary artery disease, and can be performed if the patient would otherwise be a candidate for a pharmacologic MPI.

• If the patient can walk and is having an MPI for another reason (LBBB, CABG, etc.), MPI is chosen over CMR
• Assessment of LV wall motion to identify patients with akinetic segments that would benefit from coronary revascularization
• To identify the extent and location of myocardial necrosis in patients with chronic or acute ischemic heart disease
   

References 

1. Al-Khatib SM, Stevenson WG, Ackerman MUJ, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for Management of Patients with Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death. J Am Coll Cardiol. In press. Available at: http://www.onlinejacc.org/content/accj/early/2017/10/19/j.jacc.2017.10.054.full.pdf?_ga=2.1 4551095.1842511958.1523473576-1847200754.1521829021 Retrieved April 11, 2018.
2. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease, The Task Force for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Euro Heart J. 2017; 38:2739–2791.
3. Bhave NM, Nienaber CA, Clough RE, et al. Multimodality imaging of thoracic aortic diseases in adults. J Am Coll Cardiol Cardiovascular Imaging. 2018; 1(6):903-919.
4. Birnie DH, Sauer WH, Bogun F, Cooper JM, Culver DA, Duvernoy CS, Judson MA, Kron J, Mehta D, Cosedis NJ, Patel AR, Ohe T, Raatikainen P, Soejima K. HRS expert consensus statement on the diagnosis and management of arrhythmias associated with cardiac sarcoidosis. Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11:1305–1323.
5. Bonow RO, O’Gara PT, Adams DH, et al. 2020 Focused Update of the 2017 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the Management of Mitral Regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Feb 14. Epub. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2020.02.005
6. Brignole M, Auricchio A, Baron-Esquivias G, et al. 2013 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: The Task Force on cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). Eur Heart J. 2013; 34:2281–2329.
7. Collier P, Phelan D, Klein A. A test in context: Myocardial strain measured by speckle-tracking echocardiography, J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 69:1043-1056.
8. Doherty JU, Kort S, Mehran R. et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2017 Appropriate use criteria for multimodality imaging in valvular heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70(13):1647-1672.
9. Doherty JU, Kort S, Mehran R, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2019 Appropriate Use Criteria for Multimodality Imaging in the Assessment of Cardiac Structure and Function in Nonvalvular Heart Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Feb,; 73 (4): 488-516.
10. Douglas PS, Garcia MJ, Haines DE, et al. ACCF/ASE/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR 2011 Appropriate use criteria for echocardiography: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Society of Echocardiography, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 57(9):1126-66.
11. Erbel R. 2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases, European Heart Journal. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35(41):2873–2926. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/35/41/2873/407693.
12. Figtree GA, Lonborg J, Grieve SM, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the interventional cardiologist: State-Of-The-Art Paper. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv. 2011; 4(2):137– 48.
13. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2012; 126(25):e354-471. Friedrich MG, Marcott F. How to use imaging, cardiac magnetic resonance assessment of myocarditis. Circ Imaging. 2013; 6(5):833-839.
14. Goff DC, Lloyd-Jones, DM, Bennett G, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk, A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, American Society for Preventive Cardiology, American Society of Hypertension, Association of Black Cardiologists, National Lipid Association, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, and Women Heart: The National Coalition for Women With Heart Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63(25):2935-2959.
15. Grani C, Buechel RR, Kaufmann PA, et al. Mulltimodality imaging in individuals with anomalous coronary arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol.  2017; 10(4):471-581.
16. Halliday BP, Gulati A, Ali A, et al. Association between mid-wall late gadolinium enhancement and sudden cardiac death in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and mild and moderate left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Circulation. 2017; 135(22):2106-2115. Retrieved June 6, 2018.
17. Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, et al. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 Appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic DirectionsCommittee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Radiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Interventional Radiology. J Am Coll Cardiol.  2006; 48(7):1475-1497. Available at: https://www.asnc.org/files/AUC%20for%20CCT%20and%20CMRI.pdf.
18. Henzlova MJ, Duvall WL, Einstein, AJ, et al. ASNC imaging guidelines for SPECT nuclear cardiology procedures: Stress, protocols, and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016; 23:606–39. Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12350-015-0387-x.pdf.
19. Hiratzka LF, Bakris GL, Beckman JA, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with Thoracic Aortic Disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology, American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society for Vascular Medicine. Circulation. 2010; 121(13):e266-369.
20. Hiratzka LF, Creager MA, Isselbacher EM, et al. Surgery for aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. A statement of clarification from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 67(6):724-731.
21. Hirshfeld JW, Ferrari VA, Bengel FM, et al. 2018 ACC/HRS/NASCI/SCAI/SCCT Expert consensus document on optimal use of ionizing radiation in cardiovascular imaging: Best practices for safety and effectiveness: A report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways developed in Collaboration with Mended Hearts. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 92(2):203-221.
22. Hundley WG, Bluemke DA, Finn JP, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 Expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 55(23):2614-2662. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109709036985?via%3Dihub.
23. Hussain MA, Al0Omram M, Creager MA, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for peripheral artery disease: Recent Advances. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71(21): 2450-2467.
24. Indik JH, Gimbel JR, Abe H, et al. 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on magnetic resonance imaging and radiation exposure in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Heart Rhythm. 2017; 14(7): pages e97-153. Available at: https://www.hrsonline.org/Policy-Payment/Clinical-Guidelines-Documents/2017-HRS-Expert- Consensus-Statement-on-Magnetic-Resonance-Imaging-and-Radiation-Exposure-in-Patients-with-Cardiovascular-Implantable-Electronic-Devices
25. Kinderman I, Barth C, Mahfour F, et al. Update on Myocarditis. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 2012; 59(9): 79–92.
26. Klein AL, Abbara S, Agler DA, et al. American Society of Echocardiography clinical recommendations for multimodality cardiovascular imaging of patients with pericardial disease: endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance and Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013; 26:965–1012. Kuruvilla S, Adenaw N, Katwal AB, et al. Late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac magnetic resonance predicts adverse cardiovascular outcomes in nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Circulation: Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 7:250-258. Available at: http://circimaging.ahajournals.org/content/7/2/250.
27. Lancellotti P, Knomo VT, Badano LP, et al. Expert consensus for multi-modality imaging evaluation of cardiovascular complications of radiotherapy in adults: A report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 14:721–740.
28. Marcus FI, McKenna WJ, Sherrill D, et al. Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia: proposed modification of the task force criteria. Circulation. 2010; 121(13):1533-1541.
29. Maron M. Clinical utility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012; 14(13): 1-21.
30. Maron BJ, Ommen SR, Semsarian C, et al. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, present and future, with translation into contemporary cardiovascular medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(1):
31. Maleszewski JJ, Bois MC, Bois JP, et al. State of the art review: Neoplasia and the heart, pathological review of effects with clinical and radiological correlation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 72(2): 202-227.
32. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: The Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart Jl. 2013; 34(38):2949– 3003. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/34/38/2949/442952. Nazarian S, Hansford R, Rahsepar AA, et al. Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac devices. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377:2555-2564.
33. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63(22):e57-e185.
34. Ohana M, Bakouboula B, Labani A, et al. Imaging before and after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Diagn Interven Imaging. 2015; 96:1113—1123. Available at: https://ac.els-cdn.com/S2211568415001734/1-s2.0-S2211568415001734- main.pdf?_tid=f89a367c-7c47-4066-9b2b-a55ec3dae7dd&acdnat=1525713586_4846a92586b60ba24ee857f33f7e5258
35. Otto CM, Kumbhani DJ, Alexander KP, et al. ACC Expert consensus decision pathway for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the management of adults with aortic stenosis. A report of the American College of Cardiology Task. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 69(10):1313- 1346.
36. Patel MR, Bailey SR, Bonow RO, et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 Appropriate use criteria for diagnostic catheterization:A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol.  2012; 59(22):1995-2027.
37. Patel MR, Calhoon JH, Dehmer GJ, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. JACC. 2017; 69(17):2212-2241.
38. Patel MR, White RD, Abbara S, et al, 2013 ACCF/ACR/ASE/ASNC/SCCT/SCM Appropriate utilization of cardiovascular imaging in heart failure: A joint report of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Committee and the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 61(21):2207- 2231.
39. Patel MR, Calhoon JH, Dehmer GJ, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. JACC. 2017; 69(17):2212-2241.
40. Pennell DJ. Contemporary reviews in cardiovascular medicine, cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2010; 121:692-705.
41. Pereira NL, Grogan M, Dec G. Spectrum of restrictive and infiltrative cardiomyopathies. J Am Coll Cardiol.  2018; 71(10):1149-1166.
42. Plana JC, Galderisi M, Bara, A, et al. Expert consensus for multimodality imaging evaluation of adult patients during and after cancer therapy: A report from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014; 27:911-39.
43. Russo RJ, Costa HS, Silva PD, et al. Assessing the risks associated with MRI in patients with a pacemaker or defibrillator. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376 (8):755-764.
44. Shah R, Heydari B, Coelho-Fiho O, et al. Vasodilator stress perfusion CMR imaging is feasible and prognostic in obese patients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 7(5):462-472.
45. Stout KK, Daniels CJ, Aboulhosn JA, et al. 2018 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol.  2019; 73(12):1494-1563.
46. Stout KK, Daniels CJ, Aboulhosn JA, et al. 2018 AHA/ACC Guideline for the management of adults with congenital heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;  73(18):2361-2362.
47. Svensson LG. Aortic valve and ascending aorta guidelines for management and quality measures. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013; 95:1-66. Available at: http://www.sts.org/sites/default/files/documents/AorticValveandAscendingAortaGuidelinesfor ManagementandQualityMeasures.pdf.
48. te Riele ASJM, Tandri H, Saborn DM, et al. Non-invasive multimodality imaging in ARVD/C. J Am Coll Cardiol.
49. Vita T, Okada DR, Veillet-Chowdhury M, et al. Complementary value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the assessment of cardiac sarcoidosis. CircCardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 11(1):e007030. Available at: http://circimaging.ahajournals.org/content/11/1/e007030.
50. Wiant A, Nyberg E, Gilkeson RC. CT evaluation of congenital heart disease in adults. Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 193(2):388-96. Available at: http://www.ajronline.org/doi/abs/10.2214/AJR.08.2192
51. Wolak A, Gransar H, Thomson LE, et al. Aortic size assessment by noncontrast cardiac computed tomography: normal limits by age, gender, and body surface area. J Am Coll Cardiol Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008; 1(2):200–209.
52. Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, et al. ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 Multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63(4):380-406. Available at:http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1789799.
53. Wunderlich NC, Beigel R, Ho SY, et al. Imaging for mitral interventions, methods and efficacy. J Am Coll Cardiol Cardiovascular Imaging. 2018; 11(6):872-901.
54. Yancy C, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the management of heart failure: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 62(16): e147-237.
55. Zamorano JL, Lancellotti P, Munoz DR, et al. 2016 ESC Position paper on cancer treatments and cardiovascular toxicity developed under the auspices of the ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines, The Task Force for cancer treatments and cardiovascular toxicity of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2016; 37:2768–2801.

Coding Section

Procedure and diagnosis codes on Medical Policy documents are included only as a general reference tool for each policy. They may not be all-inclusive. 

This medical policy was developed through consideration of peer-reviewed medical literature generally recognized by the relevant medical community, U.S. FDA approval status, nationally accepted standards of medical practice and accepted standards of medical practice in this community, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association technology assessment program (TEC) and other non-affiliated technology evaluation centers, reference to federal regulations, other plan medical policies, and accredited national guidelines.

"Current Procedural Terminology © American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved" 

History From 2019 Forward