| Literature DB >> 20704762 |
Dirk Lossnitzer1, Henning Steen, Alexandra Zahn, Stephanie Lehrke, Celine Weiss, Karl Heinz Weiss, Evangelos Giannitsis, Wolfgang Stremmel, Peter Sauer, Hugo A Katus, Daniel N Gotthardt.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension and cardiac alterations previously described as "cirrhotic cardiomyopathy" are known complications of end stage liver disease (ELD). Cardiac failure contributes to morbidity and mortality, particularly after liver transplantation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). We sought to identify myocardial tissue characterization and evaluate cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) for diagnosis of cardiac impairment.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20704762 PMCID: PMC2924326 DOI: 10.1186/1532-429X-12-47
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Patient characteristics
| Parameter (n = 20) | Cirrhosis patients | Controls |
|---|---|---|
| Age (mean ± SD) [years] | 52.4 ± 9.4 (24-68) | 42.0 ± 12.9 (24-69) |
| Body mass index (mean ± SD) [kg/m2] | 25.6 ± 4.9 (16.9-34.0) | 24.2 ± 3.3 (18.9-33.0) |
| Sex (M/F) | 11/9 | 60/60 |
| Bilirubin (mean ± SD) [mg/dL] | 4.68 ± 6.7 (0.33-28.8) | N/A |
| Albumin (mean ± SD) [g/L] | 30.34 ± 7.2 (19-46) | N/A |
| MELD score (mean ± SD) | 14.9 ± 6.3 (6.4-28.5) | N/A |
| Child-Pugh score (median) | 9 (5-11) | N/A |
| Etiology | ||
| Alcoholic | 12 | |
| Non-alcoholic | 8 | |
| Autoimmune | 3 | |
| Viral | 3 | |
| Cryptogenic | 2 | |
MELD score Model for End-Stage Liver Disease; Range is in brackets, SD standard deviation, N/A not assessed
Figure 1T1 Mapping intensity graph based on a lock locker sequence to quantify the optimal inversion time for LGE imaging.
Figure 2LGE quantification in short-axis orientation in ELD patients with low LGE (detected by orange dots, 11% of myocardial mass (. LV = left ventricle, RV = right ventricle, S = interventricular septum, * p < 0.05
Hemodynamic characteristics
| Parameter/mean ± SD | Cirrhosis patients | Controls | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Late enhancement [%] | 27 ± 16.5 (2-62) | N/A | N/A |
| Cardiac index [L/min/m2] | 4.36 ± 0.86 (3.41-6.48) | 3.6 ± 0.74 (2.10-6.31) | < 0.01 |
| Ejection fraction [%] | 72 ± 7.5 (49-83) | 66 ± 7.0 (33-84) | < 0.01 |
| Stroke volume [mL] | 107 ± 20.8 (81-154) | 97.4 ± 20.5 (53-155) | 0.08 |
| Cardiac output [L/min] | 7.9 ± 1.63 (4.4-11.1) | 6.7 ± 1.64 (3.5-12.5) | < 0.01 |
| Heart rate at rest [bpm] | 74.9 ± 11.9 (50-104) | 64.8 ± 9.4 (45-91) | < 0.01 |
| Syst. blood pressure rest [mmHg] | 109.8 ± 14.4 (92-132) | 126.4 ± 11.5 (105-160) | < 0.01 |
| Diast. blood pressure rest [mmHg] | 61.2 ± 7.8 (44-76) | 76.4 ± 9.0 (46-104) | < 0.01 |
| LVEDV [mL] | 150.9 ± 36.4 (98-221) | 149.4 ± 33.8 (87-252) | 0.91 |
LVEDV left ventricular enddiastolic volume; Range is in brackets; Mann-Whitney-U test for differences was performed
Figure 3LGE imaging in a normal subject who showed no signs of late enhancement in a four-chamber view (A). Patient suffering from ELD. Patchy pattern of delayed contrast enhancement (B and C). LA = left atrium, RA = right atrium, LV = left ventricle, RV = right ventricle, S = interventricular septum
Parameters of liver disease
| Parameter | Low LGE | High LGE | p (Mann-Whitney U) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MELD (mean ± SD) | 15.7 ± 5.2 | 12.3 ± 4.7 | 0.15 |
| Child-Pugh Score (median; range) | 10; (7-11) | 8; (5-11) | 0.12 |
| Bilirubin (mean ± SD) [mg/dL] | 4.4 ± 5.3 | 2.1 ± 1.4 | 0.40 |
| Creatinine (mean ± SD) [mg/dL] | 1.0 ± 0.5 | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 0.87 |
| INR (mean ± SD) | 1.46 ± 0.38 | 1.15 ± 0.16 | 0.06 |
| Age (mean ± SD) [years] | 50.9 ± 14.0 | 53.3 ± 6.0 | 1.00 |
MELD score Model for End-Stage Liver Disease, INR International normalized ratio for Quick value; Range is in brackets, SD standard deviation
LGE vs alcoholic etiology
| N | Non-alcoholic cirrhosis | Alcoholic cirrhosis |
|---|---|---|
| Low LGE | 5 | 2 |
| High LGE | 1 | 7 |
P = 0.041 (Fisher Exact Test), LGE late gadolinium enhancement
Figure 4Box plots of CI data are shown. The more pronounced hyperdynamic circulation in the high LGE group (right) compared to the low LGE group is depicted (p = 0.029).
LGE vs CI
| N | CI < 4 L/min/m2 | CI ≥ 4 L/min/m2 |
|---|---|---|
| Low LGE | 6 | 1 |
| High LGE | 1 | 6 |
P = 0.029 (Fisher Exact Test), LGE late gadolinium enhancement
Established and potential serological markers of cardiomyopathy
| Marker (mean ± SD) | Low LGE | High LGE | P (Mann-Whitney U) |
|---|---|---|---|
| NT-proBNP [ng/L] | 125.3 ± 82.2 | 101.8 ± 64.1 | 0.18 |
| hs-TNT [ng/L] | 5.6 ± 4.2 | 7.4 ± 3.8 | 0.56 |
| sFLT1 [ng/L] | 143.7 ± 22.6 | 77.1 ± 21.2 | 0.06 |
| PLGF [ng/mL] | 36.8 ± 10.3 | 20.6 ± 2.2 | 0.02 |
hsTNT high sensitivity cTNT, LGE late gadolinium enhancement, NT-proBNP N-terminal prohormone brain natiuretic peptide, hsTNT high sensitivity cTNT, sFLT1 soluble short form of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, PLGF placental growth factor
Figure 5The differences in serological markers of CMP are shown as box plots. (A) PLGF was significantly decreased in the high LGE group (p = 0.016). (B) sFLT1 showed a strong trend to be decreased in the high LGE group (p = 0.057) (C) NT-proBNP was not significantly different between the two groups, but very high values ( > 1000 ng/L) could only be found in the high LGE group, * p < 0.05