| Literature DB >> 23758789 |
Edythe B Tham1, Mark J Haykowsky, Kelvin Chow, Maria Spavor, Sachie Kaneko, Nee S Khoo, Joseph J Pagano, Andrew S Mackie, Richard B Thompson.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The late cardiotoxic effects of anthracycline chemotherapy influence morbidity and mortality in the growing population of childhood cancer survivors. Even with lower anthracycline doses, evidence of adverse cardiac remodeling and reduced exercise capacity exist. We aim to examine the relationship between cardiac structure, function and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) tissue characteristics with chemotherapy dose and exercise capacity in childhood cancer survivors.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23758789 PMCID: PMC3688348 DOI: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-48
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Figure 1SASHA Tmapping method in a subject 15 minutes post-contrast. On each of 10 saturation recovery images, the endocardium, epicardium and a region of interest in the blood are selected. The myocardium is automatically divided into 18 circumferential segments and T1 values are calculated in each segment by fitting a recovery curve as described in the methods. Average signal intensity in a septal segment (white box, far right image) are shown along with a best-fit saturation recovery curve. S is the measured signal intensity normalized to the non-saturated image intensity, η is the best-fit saturation efficiency, TS are saturation recovery times and T1 is the best fit T1 value.
Characteristics of eligible subjects
| Age (years) | 15.2 ± 2.7 | 14.7 ± 2.4 | 0.17 |
| Male (%) | 50 | 70 | 0.72 |
| Anthracycline dose (mg/m2) | 197.2 ± 84.3 | 200.2 ± 83.0 | 0.92 |
| Time from chemo (years) | 7.6 ± 4.5 | 8.3 ± 5.0 | 0.90 |
| Chest irradiation (%) | 17% | 25% | 0.72 |
Traditional 2D Echocardiography parameters of patients and controls
| FS (%) | 34 ± 3 | 37 ± 4 | <0.01 |
| E velocity (cm/s) | 82.3 ± 11.2 | 83.5 ± 19.9 | NS |
| A velocity (cm/s) | 43.0 ± 14 | 40.3 ± 11.3 | NS |
| Lateral E’ velocity (cm/s) | 12.6 ± 2.2 | 14.6 ± 2.1 | 0.001 |
| Lateral A’ velocity (cm/s) | 3.1 ± 1.2 | 4.2 ± 1.4 | <0.01 |
| Lateral S’ velocity (cm/s) | 7.2 ± 2.3 | 7.7 ± 2.1 | NS |
| Lateral E/E’ | 6.7 ± 1.4 | 5.9 ± 1.0 | 0.03 |
| Medial E’ velocity (cm/s) | 10.3 ± 1.5 | 11.0 ± 5.1 | NS |
| Medial A’ velocity (cm/s) | 3.4 ± 1.5 | 4.2 ± 2.1 | 0.05 |
| Medial S’ velocity (cm/s) | 6.0 ± 1.1 | 6.6 ± 0.8 | 0.01 |
| Medial E/E’ | 8.1 ± 1.4 | 7.4 ± 1.5 | 0.03 |
| Medial IVRT (ms) | 59.9 ± 16.9 | 63.3 ± 11.9 | NS |
Abbreviations: FS: fractional shortening, IVRT: isovolumic relaxation time.
Speckle tracking strain parameters of patients and controls
| | | | |
| strain (%) | −18.1 ± 3.2 | −21.0 ± 1.6 | <0.01 |
| SR (%/s) | −1.05 ± 0.2 | −1.2 ± 0.12 | <0.01 |
| diastolic SR (%/s) | 1.65 ± 0.5 | 1.99 ± 0.47 | <0.01 |
| | | | |
| strain (%) | −17.8 ± 3.4 | −19.9 ± 2.5 | <0.01 |
| SR (%/s) | −1.19 ± 0.22 | −1.24 ± 0.18 | NS |
| diastolic SR (%/s) | 1.68 ± 0.49 | 2.06 ± 0.42 | <0.01 |
Abbreviation: SR: strain rate.
CMR parameters of subjects
| LVEF (%) | 57.6 ± 4.9 | 41 - 74 |
| LVEDVi (ml/m2) | 87.8 ± 16.0 | 55.5 - 114.5 |
| LVESVi (ml/m2) | 37.4 ± 8.8 | 23.0 - 71.3 |
| LV mass index (g/m2) | 52.6 ± 12.6 | 33.7 - 99.2 |
| Mass/volume ratio (g/ml) | 0.6 ± 0.1 | 0.55 - 0.96 |
| Wall thickness/height ratio | 0.035 ± 0.005 | 0.027 – 0.046 |
| Myocardial T2 (ms) | 54.6 ± 4.9 | 43.2 - 65.7 |
| Myocardial T1 (baseline, ms) | 1155.3 ± 56.5 | 1074 - 1300 |
| Blood T1 (baseline, ms) | 1449.0 ± 215.2 | 1279-1839 |
| Myocardial T1 (post-Gd, ms) | 652.1 ± 53.6 | 540 - 750 |
| Blood T1 (post-Gd, ms) | 390.5 ± 51.6 | 310 - 498 |
| ECV (%) | 20.7 ± 3.6 | 14.7 – 27.5 |
Abbreviations: ECV: extracellular volume, Gd: gadolinium.
Figure 2Tand ECV mapping analysis in a representative subject. A) and B) show the baseline T1 values in the 18 segment model and the corresponding pixel map, respectively. The reference right ventricular insertion point is indicated by the arrow. Similar results for post-contrast T1 values are shown in C) and D), as well as for the calculated extracellular volume fraction, in E) and F).
Figure 3Correlation of extracellular volume fraction (ECV) with A) anthracycline dose, B) peak VO, C) left ventricular mass/LVEDV and D) LV wall thickness/height. Error bars show the 95% confidence interval.
Figure 4Correlation of baseline myocardial Twith A) anthracycline dose and B) left ventricular mass/LVEDV and C) LV wall thickness normalized to height. Error bars show the 95% confidence interval.
Figure 5Correlation of anthracycline dose with peak VO. Error bars show the 95% confidence interval.