- Author: Wai Hong Wilson Tang, MD; Chief Editor: Henry H Ooi, MD, MRCPI more...
Laboratory studies may include the following:
Complete blood count (CBC) - Leukocytosis (may demonstrate eosinophilia)
Elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (and other acute phase reactants, such as C-reactive protein)
Rheumatologic screening - To rule out systemic inflammatory diseases
Elevated cardiac enzymes - Creatine kinase or cardiac troponins
Serum viral antibody titers - For viral myocarditis
Elevated cardiac enzymes are an indicator for cardiac myonecrosis. Cardiac troponin (troponin I or T), in particular, is elevated in at least 50% of patients with biopsy-proven myocarditis. Cardiac enzymes may also help to identify patients with resolution of viral myocarditis.
The test has 89% specificity and 34% sensitivity and increases more frequently than creatine kinase MB subunits (elevated in only 5.7% of patients with biopsy-proven myocarditis). However, these studies have been performed using standard clinical assays, and the sensitivity of newer-generation high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays in diagnosing myocarditis may differ.
Viral antibody titers
Common viral antibody titers available for clinical evaluation include coxsackievirus group B, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), cytomegalovirus, Ebstein-Barr virus, hepatitis virus family, and influenza viruses. Titers increase 4-fold or more, with a gradual fall during convalescence (nonspecific); hence, serial testing is required.
Antibody titer testing is rarely indicated in the diagnosis of viral myocarditis or any dilated cardiomyopathies, owing to its low specificity and the delayed rising of viral titers, which would have no impact on therapeutic decisions.
The presence of viral genome in endomyocardial biopsy samples is considered the criterion standard for viral persistence. However, the test lacks specificity, because the presence of viral genome can also be present in healthy controls. The most common viral genomes found include those of parvovirus and herpes simplex.
Biopsy specimens from EMB should reveal the simultaneous findings of lymphocyte infiltration and myocyte necrosis.
Echocardiography is performed to exclude other causes of heart failure (eg, amyloidosis or valvular or congenital causes) and to evaluate the degree of cardiac dysfunction (usually diffuse hypokinesis and diastolic dysfunction). It also may allow gross localization of the extent of inflammation (ie, wall motion abnormalities, wall thickening, pericardial effusion). In addition, echocardiography may distinguish between fulminant and acute myocarditis by identifying near-normal left ventricular diastolic dimensions and increased septal thickness in fulminant myocarditis (versus increased left ventricular diastolic dimensions and normal septal thickness in acute myocarditis), with marked improvement in systolic function in time.
Antimyosin scintigraphy (using antimyosin antibody injections) can identify myocardial inflammation with high sensitivity (91-100%) and negative predictive power (93-100%) but has low specificity (31-44%) and low positive predictive power (28-33%). In contrast, gallium scanning is used to reflect severe myocardial cellular infiltration and has a good negative predictive value, although specificity is low. Positron emission tomography (PET) scanning has been used in selected cases (eg, sarcoidosis) to assess the degree and location of inflammation.
Additional Imaging Techniques
Cardiac angiography is often indicated to rule out coronary ischemia as a cause of new-onset heart failure, especially when clinical presentation mimics acute myocardial infarction. It usually shows high filling pressures and reduced cardiac outputs.
Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used for assessment of the extent of inflammation and cellular edema, although it is still nonspecific. Delayed-enhanced MRI has also been used to quantify the amount of scarring that occurred following acute myocarditis.
Monney et al suggested that cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) scanning may be useful in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome who are found not to have coronary artery disease. Despite preserved systolic function, a significant proportion of these patients were subsequently diagnosed with acute myocarditis on the basis of the CMR scan findings.
Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) is the criterion standard for the diagnosis of myocarditis, although it has limited sensitivity and specificity, as inflammation can be diffuse or focal. However, the use of routine EMB in establishing the diagnosis of myocarditis rarely is helpful clinically, since histologic diagnosis seldom has an impact on therapeutic strategies, unless giant cell myocarditis is suspected.[2, 3]
However, the Heart Failure Society of America 2010 comprehensive heart failure practice guideline recommends considering endomyocardial biopsy for patients with acute deterioration of heart function of unknown origin that is not responding to medical treatment.
The risk of adverse events in endomyocardial biopsy approaches 6%, including complications in 2.7% of patients on sheath insertion and 3.3% on the biopsy procedure; there is also a 0.5% probability of perforation.
Because of sampling technique, sensitivity may increase with multiple biopsies (50% for 1 biopsy, 90% for 7 biopsies). The standard is to obtain at least 4 or 5 biopsies, although false-negative rates still may be as high as 55%.
False-positive rates are also high, owing to small numbers of normally occurring lymphocytes in the myocardium and the difficulty in distinguishing between lymphocytes and other cells (such as eosinophils in hypersensitive/eosinophilic myocarditis). Moreover, wide interobserver variability in histologic interpretations is also a factor.
Noncaseating granulomas for sarcoid myocarditis are found in only 5% of cases by biopsies and in as many as 27% in autopsy series.
Persistent viral messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA), which can be found in only 25-50% of patients with biopsy-proven acute myocarditis, often confers a poor prognosis. Epidemiologic results from the European Study on the Epidemiology and Treatment of Cardiac Inflammatory Disease (ESETCID) database found that only 11.8% of patients with suspected acute or chronic myocarditis and reduced ejection fractions had detectable viral genomes in biopsy samples.
Electrocardiograms are often nonspecific (eg, sinus tachycardia, nonspecific ST- or T-wave changes). Occasionally, heart block (atrioventricular block or intraventricular conduction delay), ventricular arrhythmia, or injury patterns, with ST- or T-wave changes mimicking myocardial ischemia or pericarditis (pseudoinfarction pattern), may indicate poorer prognosis. Arrhythmia is common in Chagas heart disease. The following may be seen: right bundle-branch block with or without bifascicular block (50%), complete heart block (7-8%), atrial fibrillation (7-10%), and ventricular arrhythmia (39%).
The Dallas classification (1987) and the World Health Organization (WHO) Marburg classification (1996) are commonly used based on the patterns in the following histologic characteristics :
Cell types - Lymphocytic, eosinophilic, neutrophilic, giant cell, granulomatous, or mixed
Amount - None (grade 0), mild (grade 1), moderate (grade 2), or severe (grade 3)
Distribution - Focal (outside vessel lumen), confluent, diffuse, or reparative (in fibrotic areas)
The Dallas classification on initial biopsy is as follows:
Myocarditis - Myocardial necrosis, degeneration, or both, in the absence of significant coronary artery disease with adjacent inflammatory infiltrate with or without fibrosis
Borderline myocarditis - Inflammatory infiltrate too sparse or myocyte damage not apparent
The Dallas classification on subsequent biopsy is as follows:
Ongoing (persistent) myocarditis with or without fibrosis
Resolving (healing) myocarditis with or without fibrosis
Resolved (healed) myocarditis with or without fibrosis
WHO Marburg criteria (1996) defines myocarditis as a minimum of 14 infiltrating leukocytes/mm2, preferably T cells (CD45RO), with as many as 4 macrophages possibly included.
Rosenstein ED, Zucker MJ, Kramer N. Giant cell myocarditis: most fatal of autoimmune diseases. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2000 Aug. 30(1):1-16. [Medline].
Karatolios K, Pankuweit S, Maisch B. Diagnosis and treatment of myocarditis: the role of endomyocardial biopsy. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. December 2007. 9:473-81. [Medline].
Cooper LT, Baughman KL, Feldman AM, Frustaci A, Jessup M, Kuhl U, et al. The role of endomyocardial biopsy in the management of cardiovascular disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology, and the European Society of Cardiology. Circulation. Nov 2007. 116:2216-33. [Medline]. [Full Text].
Lindenfeld J, Albert NM, Boehmer JP, Collins SP, Ezekowitz JA, Givertz MM, et al. HFSA 2010 Comprehensive Heart Failure Practice Guideline. J Card Fail. 2010 Jun. 16(6):e1-194. [Medline].
Rajagopal SK, Almond CS, Laussen PC, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for the support of infants, children, and young adults with acute myocarditis: a review of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry. Crit Care Med. 2009 Sep 28. [Medline].
Aretz HT, Billingham ME, Edwards WD, et al. Myocarditis. A histopathologic definition and classification. Am J Cardiovasc Pathol. 1987 Jan. 1(1):3-14. [Medline].
Feldman AM, McNamara D. Myocarditis. N Engl J Med. 2000 Nov 9. 343(19):1388-98. [Medline].
Venteo L, Bourlet T, Renois F, et al. Enterovirus-related activation of the cardiomyocyte mitochondrial apoptotic pathway in patients with acute myocarditis. Eur Heart J. 2009 Nov 19. [Medline].
Bowles NE, Towbin JA. Molecular aspects of myocarditis. Curr Opin Cardiol. 1998 May. 13(3):179-84. [Medline].
Badorff C, Knowlton KU. Dystrophin disruption in enterovirus-induced myocarditis and dilated cardiomyopathy: from bench to bedside. Med Microbiol Immunol (Berl). 2004 May. 193(2-3):121-6. [Medline].
Klugman D, Berger JT, Sable CA, et al. Pediatric patients hospitalized with myocarditis: a multi-institutional analysis. Pediatr Cardiol. 2009 Nov 21. [Medline].
Kuhl U, Pauschinger M, Noutsias M, et al. High prevalence of viral genomes and multiple viral infections in the myocardium of adults with "idiopathic" left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation. 2005 Feb 22. 111(7):887-93. [Medline].
Karjalainen J, Heikkila J. Incidence of three presentations of acute myocarditis in young men in military service. A 20-year experience. Eur Heart J. 1999 Aug. 20(15):1120-5. [Medline].
Durani Y, Egan M, Baffa J, et al. Pediatric myocarditis: presenting clinical characteristics. Am J Emerg Med. 2009 Oct. 27(8):942-7. [Medline].
Wakafuji S, Okada R. Twenty year autopsy statistics of myocarditis incidence in Japan. Jpn Circ J. 1986 Dec. 50(12):1288-93. [Medline].
Pulerwitz TC, Cappola TP, Felker GM, et al. Mortality in primary and secondary myocarditis. Am Heart J. 2004 Apr. 147(4):746-50. [Medline].
McCarthy RE 3rd, Boehmer JP, Hruban RH, et al. Long-term outcome of fulminant myocarditis as compared with acute (nonfulminant) myocarditis. N Engl J Med. 2000 Mar 9. 342(10):690-5. [Medline].
Lauer B, Schannwell M, Kuhl U, et al. Antimyosin autoantibodies are associated with deterioration of systolic and diastolic left ventricular function in patients with chronic myocarditis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000 Jan. 35(1):11-8. [Medline].
Fuse K, Kodama M, Okura Y, Ito M, Hirono S, Kato K, et al. Predictors of disease course in patients with acute myocarditis. Circulation. 2000 Dec 5. 102(23):2829-35. [Medline].
D'Ambrosio A, Patti G, Manzoli A, et al. The fate of acute myocarditis between spontaneous improvement and evolution to dilated cardiomyopathy: a review. Heart. 2001 May. 85(5):499-504. [Medline].
Dec GW Jr, Palacios IF, Fallon JT, et al. Active myocarditis in the spectrum of acute dilated cardiomyopathies. Clinical features, histologic correlates, and clinical outcome. N Engl J Med. 1985 Apr 4. 312(14):885-90. [Medline].
Kawai C. From myocarditis to cardiomyopathy: mechanisms of inflammation and cell death: learning from the past for the future. Circulation. 1999 Mar 2. 99(8):1091-100. [Medline].
Mason JW, O'Connell JB, Herskowitz A, et al. A clinical trial of immunosuppressive therapy for myocarditis. The Myocarditis Treatment Trial Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1995 Aug 3. 333(5):269-75. [Medline].
Cooper LT Jr, Berry GJ, Shabetai R. Idiopathic giant-cell myocarditis--natural history and treatment. Multicenter Giant Cell Myocarditis Study Group Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26. 336(26):1860-6. [Medline].
Al-Mallah M, Kwong RY. Clinical application of cardiac CMR. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2009 Summer. 10(3):134-41. [Medline].
Monney PA, Sekhri N, Burchell T, et al. Acute myocarditis presenting as acute coronary syndrome: role of early cardiac magnetic resonance in its diagnosis. Heart. 2011 Aug. 97(16):1312-8. [Medline].
Hufnagel G, Pankuweit S, Richter A, et al. The European Study of Epidemiology and Treatment of Cardiac Inflammatory Diseases (ESETCID). First epidemiological results. Herz. 2000 May. 25(3):279-85. [Medline].
Wang JF, Meissner A, Malek S, Chen Y, Ke Q, Zhang J, et al. Propranolol ameliorates and epinephrine exacerbates progression of acute and chronic viral myocarditis. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2005 Oct. 289(4):H1577-83. [Medline].
Parrillo JE, Cunnion RE, Epstein SE, et al. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial of prednisone for dilated cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 1989 Oct 19. 321(16):1061-8. [Medline].
McNamara DM, Starling RC, Dec GW. Intervention in myocarditis and acute cardiomyopathy with immune globulin: results from the randomized placebo controlled IMAC trial. Circulation. 1999. 100 (Suppl):I-21.
Frustaci A, Chimenti C, Calabrese F, et al. Immunosuppressive therapy for active lymphocytic myocarditis: virological and immunologic profile of responders versus nonresponders. Circulation. 2003 Feb 18. 107(6):857-63. [Medline].
Hsiao JF, Koshino Y, Bonnichsen CR, Yu Y, Miller FA Jr, Pellikka PA, et al. Speckle tracking echocardiography in acute myocarditis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Feb. 29(2):275-84. [Medline].