BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with end-stage renal failure (ESRD) have an increased risk of premature cardiovascular (CV) disease. Left ventricular hypertrophy is an independent risk factor for CV events and death in ESRD. Renal transplantation has been associated with reduction in CV risk and echocardiographic regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. However, echocardiography overestimates LV mass in ESRD patients. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) provides more detailed, volume-independent, measures of cardiac structure. Changes in LV mass measured by CMR after renal transplantation were studied. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Fifty patients underwent CMR on two occasions. Twenty-five were transplanted before the second scan. CMR was performed to measure LV mass index (LVMI), ejection fraction, end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes. Changes were expressed as percentage change over time. Patients with CV events between scans (e.g., acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction) were excluded. All transplant patients had serum creatinine <150 mumol/L. RESULTS: There was no significant change in LVMI between patients who underwent renal transplantation and those who remained on dialysis (transplanted mean, 2.75%/yr, +/- 9.1 versus dialysis, -3.6%/yr +/- 16.7). In addition, there were no significant changes in end-diastolic volume (transplant, 0.1%/yr +/- 19.5 versus not transplanted, -3.4%/yr +/- 31.5), end-systolic volume (transplanted mean, 15.2%/yr +/- 65.2 versus not transplanted, 3.0%/yr +/- 55.5), or ejection fraction (transplant, 2.1%/yr +/- 11.9 versus not transplanted, -0.4%/yr +/- 5.3). CONCLUSIONS: Renal transplantation is not associated with significant regression of LVMI on CMR compared with patients who remain on the transplant waiting list.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Patients with end-stage renal failure (ESRD) have an increased risk of premature cardiovascular (CV) disease. Left ventricular hypertrophy is an independent risk factor for CV events and death in ESRD. Renal transplantation has been associated with reduction in CV risk and echocardiographic regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. However, echocardiography overestimates LV mass in ESRDpatients. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) provides more detailed, volume-independent, measures of cardiac structure. Changes in LV mass measured by CMR after renal transplantation were studied. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Fifty patients underwent CMR on two occasions. Twenty-five were transplanted before the second scan. CMR was performed to measure LV mass index (LVMI), ejection fraction, end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes. Changes were expressed as percentage change over time. Patients with CV events between scans (e.g., acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction) were excluded. All transplant patients had serum creatinine <150 mumol/L. RESULTS: There was no significant change in LVMI between patients who underwent renal transplantation and those who remained on dialysis (transplanted mean, 2.75%/yr, +/- 9.1 versus dialysis, -3.6%/yr +/- 16.7). In addition, there were no significant changes in end-diastolic volume (transplant, 0.1%/yr +/- 19.5 versus not transplanted, -3.4%/yr +/- 31.5), end-systolic volume (transplanted mean, 15.2%/yr +/- 65.2 versus not transplanted, 3.0%/yr +/- 55.5), or ejection fraction (transplant, 2.1%/yr +/- 11.9 versus not transplanted, -0.4%/yr +/- 5.3). CONCLUSIONS: Renal transplantation is not associated with significant regression of LVMI on CMR compared with patients who remain on the transplant waiting list.
Authors: Allan J Collins; Robert Foley; Charles Herzog; Blanche Chavers; David Gilbertson; Areef Ishani; Bertram Kasiske; Jiannong Liu; Lih-Wen Mau; Marshall McBean; Anne Murray; Wendy St Peter; Jay Xue; Qiao Fan; Haifeng Guo; Qi Li; Shuling Li; Suying Li; Yi Peng; Yang Qiu; Tricia Roberts; Melissa Skeans; Jon Snyder; Craig Solid; Changchun Wang; Eric Weinhandl; David Zaun; Rui Zhang; Cheryl Arko; Shu-Cheng Chen; Frederick Dalleska; Frank Daniels; Stephan Dunning; James Ebben; Eric Frazier; Christopher Hanzlik; Roger Johnson; Daniel Sheets; Xinyue Wang; Beth Forrest; Edward Constantini; Susan Everson; Paul Eggers; Lawrence Agodoa Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: R A Wolfe; V B Ashby; E L Milford; A O Ojo; R E Ettenger; L Y Agodoa; P J Held; F K Port Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-12-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kenneth Lim; Stephen M S Ting; Thomas Hamborg; Gordon McGregor; David Oxborough; Claudia Tomkins; Dihua Xu; Ravi Thadhani; Gregory Lewis; Rosemary Bland; Prithwish Banerjee; Simon Fletcher; Nithya S Krishnan; Robert Higgins; Daniel Zehnder; Thomas F Hiemstra Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Alexander Kainz; Georg Goliasch; Franz Wiesbauer; Thomas Binder; Gerald Maurer; Hans-Joachim Nesser; Regina Mascherbauer; Christian Ebner; Reinhard Kramar; Julia Wilflingseder; Rainer Oberbauer Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Clark Kensinger; Antonio Hernandez; Aihua Bian; Meagan Fairchild; Guanhua Chen; Loren Lipworth; T Alp Ikizler; Kelly A Birdwell Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: M Kovářová; Z Žilinská; J Páleš; Z Kužmová; A Gažová; J Smaha; M Kužma; P Jackuliak; V Štvrtinová; J Kyselovič; J Payer Journal: Physiol Res Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 1.881
Authors: Krista L Lentine; Huiling Xiao; Daniel C Brennan; Mark A Schnitzler; Todd C Villines; Kevin C Abbott; David Axelrod; Jon J Snyder; Paul J Hauptman Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Luke C Pickup; Jonathan P Law; Ashwin Radhakrishnan; Anna M Price; Charalampos Loutradis; Toby O Smith; Nicola C Edwards; Richard P Steeds; Jonathan N Townend; Charles J Ferro Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2021-03-15
Authors: Carolyn L van Eps; Leanne Jeffriess; Brian Haluska; Carmel M Hawley; Jeffrey Coombes; Aya Matsumoto; Janine K Jeffries; David W Johnson; Scott B Campbell; Nicole M Isbel; David W Mudge; Thomas Marwick Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2011-10-03 Impact factor: 2.388