Jeremy Collins1, Cort Sommerville1, Patrick Magrath1, Bruce Spottiswoode1, Benjamin H Freed1, Keith H Benzuly1, Robert Gordon1, Himabindu Vidula1, Dan C Lee1, Clyde Yancy1, James Carr1, Michael Markl2. 1. From the Departments of Radiology (J. Collins, C.S., J. Carr, M.M.) and Biomedical Engineering (P.M., M.M.) and Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine (B.H.F., K.H.B., R.G., H.V., D.C.L., C.Y.), Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; and Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Chicago, IL (B.S.). 2. From the Departments of Radiology (J. Collins, C.S., J. Carr, M.M.) and Biomedical Engineering (P.M., M.M.) and Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine (B.H.F., K.H.B., R.G., H.V., D.C.L., C.Y.), Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; and Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Chicago, IL (B.S.). michael.markl@northwestern.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonischemic cardiomyopathy is a common cause of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and myocardial fibrosis. The purpose of this study was to noninvasively evaluate changes in segmental LV extracellular volume (ECV) fraction, LV velocities, myocardial scar, and wall motion in nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cardiac MRI including pre- and postcontrast myocardial T1 mapping and velocity quantification (tissue phase mapping) of the LV (basal, midventricular, and apical short axis) was applied in 31 patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (50±18 years). Analysis based on the 16-segment American Heart Association model was used to evaluate the segmental distribution of ECV, peak systolic and diastolic myocardial velocities, scar determined by late gadolinium enhancement, and wall motion abnormalities. LV segments with scar or impaired wall motion were significantly associated with elevated ECV (rs =0.26; P<0.001) and reduced peak systolic radial velocities (r=-0.43; P<0.001). Regional myocardial velocities and ECV were similar for patients with reduced (n=12; ECV=0.28±0.06) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (n=19; ECV=0.30±0.09). Patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction showed significant relationships between increasing ECV and reduced systolic (r=-0.19; r=-0.30) and diastolic (r=0.34; r=0.26) radial and long-axis peak velocities (P<0.001). Even after excluding myocardial segments with late gadolinium enhancement, significant relationships between ECV and segmental LV velocities were maintained indicating the potential of elevated ECV to identify regional diffuse fibrosis not visible by late gadolinium enhancement, which was associated with impaired regional LV function. CONCLUSIONS: Regionally elevated ECV negatively affected myocardial velocities. The association of elevated regional ECV with reduced myocardial velocities independent of left ventricular ejection fraction suggests a structure-function relationship between altered ECV and segmental myocardial function in nonischemic cardiomyopathy.
BACKGROUND: Nonischemic cardiomyopathy is a common cause of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and myocardial fibrosis. The purpose of this study was to noninvasively evaluate changes in segmental LV extracellular volume (ECV) fraction, LV velocities, myocardial scar, and wall motion in nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cardiac MRI including pre- and postcontrast myocardial T1 mapping and velocity quantification (tissue phase mapping) of the LV (basal, midventricular, and apical short axis) was applied in 31 patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (50±18 years). Analysis based on the 16-segment American Heart Association model was used to evaluate the segmental distribution of ECV, peak systolic and diastolic myocardial velocities, scar determined by late gadolinium enhancement, and wall motion abnormalities. LV segments with scar or impaired wall motion were significantly associated with elevated ECV (rs =0.26; P<0.001) and reduced peak systolic radial velocities (r=-0.43; P<0.001). Regional myocardial velocities and ECV were similar for patients with reduced (n=12; ECV=0.28±0.06) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (n=19; ECV=0.30±0.09). Patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction showed significant relationships between increasing ECV and reduced systolic (r=-0.19; r=-0.30) and diastolic (r=0.34; r=0.26) radial and long-axis peak velocities (P<0.001). Even after excluding myocardial segments with late gadolinium enhancement, significant relationships between ECV and segmental LV velocities were maintained indicating the potential of elevated ECV to identify regional diffuse fibrosis not visible by late gadolinium enhancement, which was associated with impaired regional LV function. CONCLUSIONS: Regionally elevated ECV negatively affected myocardial velocities. The association of elevated regional ECV with reduced myocardial velocities independent of left ventricular ejection fraction suggests a structure-function relationship between altered ECV and segmental myocardial function in nonischemic cardiomyopathy.
Authors: Kelvin Chow; Jacqueline A Flewitt; Jordin D Green; Joseph J Pagano; Matthias G Friedrich; Richard B Thompson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-07-23 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Andrew S Flett; Martin P Hayward; Michael T Ashworth; Michael S Hansen; Andrew M Taylor; Perry M Elliott; Christopher McGregor; James C Moon Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-06-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Michael Jerosch-Herold; David C Sheridan; Jessica D Kushner; Deirdre Nauman; Donna Burgess; Diana Dutton; Rami Alharethi; Duanxiang Li; Ray E Hershberger Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2008-07-25 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Jana G Delfino; Kevin R Johnson; Robert L Eisner; Susan Eder; Angel R Leon; John N Oshinski Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-01-25 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Leah Iles; Heinz Pfluger; Arintaya Phrommintikul; Joshi Cherayath; Pelin Aksit; Sandeep N Gupta; David M Kaye; Andrew J Taylor Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-11-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alexander Ruh; Roberto Sarnari; Haben Berhane; Kenny Sidoryk; Kai Lin; Ryan Dolan; Arleen Li; Michael J Rose; Joshua D Robinson; James C Carr; Cynthia K Rigsby; Michael Markl Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Kai Lin; Varun Chowdhary; Keith H Benzuly; Clyde W Yancy; Jon W Lomasney; Vera H Rigolin; Allen S Anderson; Jane Wilcox; James Carr; Michael Markl Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-04-26 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Kai Lin; Jeremy D Collins; Varun Chowdhary; Michael Markl; James C Carr Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Mojca Bervar; Mirta Kozelj; Gregor Poglajen; Matjaz Sever; Gregor Zemljic; Sabina Frljak; Marko Cukjati; Peter Cernelc; François Haddad; Bojan Vrtovec Journal: Stem Cells Transl Med Date: 2017-03-11 Impact factor: 6.940
Authors: Christopher M Haggerty; Jonathan D Suever; Arichanah Pulenthiran; Abba Mejia-Spiegeler; Gregory J Wehner; Linyuan Jing; Richard J Charnigo; Brandon K Fornwalt; Mark A Fogel Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Pankaj Garg; David A Broadbent; Peter P Swoboda; James R J Foley; Graham J Fent; Tarique A Musa; David P Ripley; Bara Erhayiem; Laura E Dobson; Adam K McDiarmid; Philip Haaf; Ananth Kidambi; Saul Crandon; Pei G Chew; R J van der Geest; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2017-09-25 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Sarah Ghonim; Inga Voges; Peter D Gatehouse; Jennifer Keegan; Michael A Gatzoulis; Philip J Kilner; Sonya V Babu-Narayan Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2017-05-23