Table 1.

Summary of current cardiac imaging modalities used in UC

Modality	Use in UC	Characteristic findings in UC	Advantages and limitations	References
Echocardiography	Evaluation of function and structure of myocardium; evaluation of cardiac valves	Volume and pressure abnormalities; increased LV mass index; presence and severity of LVH	Cost-effective; noninvasive; portable; can accurately assess for hypertrophy of myocardium Operator dependent; prone to inaccuracy due to measurements being derived; no information on epicardial artery or microvascular disease; no information on interstitial tissue	Arrigo et al. [28] Foley et al. [29]
Cardiac MRI	Evaluation of myocardial structure and function, cardiac valves, myocardial interstitium, and coronary artery flow	Myocardial fibrosis, myocardial edema	More accurate and reproducible than echocardiography; higher imaging quality compared with echocardiography; gold standard of cardiac imaging More expensive; less accessible; use of gadolinium-based contrast associated with nephrogenic systemic fibrosis	Arcari et al. [30] McIntyre et al. [31]
PET	Evaluation of myocardial perfusion, micro- and macro-vasculature, and left ventricular function	Ischemia, infarction, inflammation	Reliable assessment of ischemia; allows for evaluation of microvasculature Variability of radiotracer uptake contributes to variations in results; little research into distribution of radiotracer uptake in kidney failure	Lau et al. [32]

Adapted from Kott et al. [33]. CC-BY-NC.

MRI magnetic resonance imaging, PET positron emission tomography, UC uremic cardiomyopathy, LV left ventricular, LVH left ventricular hypertrophy