OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to assess whether myocardial stiffness could be measured by shear wave imaging (SWI) and whether myocardial stiffness accurately quantified myocardial function. BACKGROUND: SWI is a novel ultrasound-based technique for quantitative, local, and noninvasive mapping of soft tissue elastic properties. METHODS: SWI was performed in Langendorff perfused isolated rat hearts (n = 6). Shear wave was generated and imaged in the left ventricular myocardium using a conventional ultrasonic probe connected to an ultrafast scanner (12,000 frames/s). The local myocardial stiffness was derived from shear wave velocity every 7.5 ms during 1 single cardiac cycle. RESULTS: The average myocardial stiffness was 8.6 ± 0.7 kPa in systole and 1.7 ± 0.8 kPa in diastole. Myocardial stiffness was compared with isovolumic systolic pressure at rest and during administration of isoproterenol (10(-9), 10(-8), and 10(-7) mol/l, 5 min each). Systolic myocardial stiffness increased strongly up to 23.4 ± 3.4 kPa. Myocardial stiffness correlated strongly with isovolumic systolic pressure (r(2) = [0.94; 0.98], p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial stiffness can be measured in real time over the cardiac cycle using SWI, which allows quantification of stiffness variation between systole and diastole. Systolic myocardial stiffness provides a noninvasive index of myocardial contractility.
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to assess whether myocardial stiffness could be measured by shear wave imaging (SWI) and whether myocardial stiffness accurately quantified myocardial function. BACKGROUND: SWI is a novel ultrasound-based technique for quantitative, local, and noninvasive mapping of soft tissue elastic properties. METHODS: SWI was performed in Langendorff perfused isolated rat hearts (n = 6). Shear wave was generated and imaged in the left ventricular myocardium using a conventional ultrasonic probe connected to an ultrafast scanner (12,000 frames/s). The local myocardial stiffness was derived from shear wave velocity every 7.5 ms during 1 single cardiac cycle. RESULTS: The average myocardial stiffness was 8.6 ± 0.7 kPa in systole and 1.7 ± 0.8 kPa in diastole. Myocardial stiffness was compared with isovolumic systolic pressure at rest and during administration of isoproterenol (10(-9), 10(-8), and 10(-7) mol/l, 5 min each). Systolic myocardial stiffness increased strongly up to 23.4 ± 3.4 kPa. Myocardial stiffness correlated strongly with isovolumic systolic pressure (r(2) = [0.94; 0.98], p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS:Myocardial stiffness can be measured in real time over the cardiac cycle using SWI, which allows quantification of stiffness variation between systole and diastole. Systolic myocardial stiffness provides a noninvasive index of myocardial contractility.
Authors: Robert M Pohlman; Tomy Varghese; Jingfeng Jiang; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; Marci L Alexander; Kelly L Wergin; James L Hinshaw; Meghan G Lubner; Shane A Wells; Fred T Lee Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Maryam Vejdani-Jahromi; Jenna Freedman; Matthew Nagle; Young-Joong Kim; Gregg E Trahey; Patrick D Wolf Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Jaydev K Dave; Maureen E Mc Donald; Praveen Mehrotra; Andrew R Kohut; John R Eisenbrey; Flemming Forsberg Journal: Ultrasonics Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Cristina Pislaru; Matthew W Urban; Sorin V Pislaru; Randall R Kinnick; James F Greenleaf Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2014-05-06 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Matthew W Urban; Cristina Pislaru; Ivan Z Nenadic; Randall R Kinnick; James F Greenleaf Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Peter Hollender; David Bradway; Patrick Wolf; Robi Goswami; Gregg Trahey Journal: IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 2.725
Authors: Maryam Vejdani-Jahromi; Jenna Freedman; Young-Joong Kim; Gregg E Trahey; Patrick D Wolf Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2018-01-10 Impact factor: 2.998