| Literature DB >> 25885436 |
Sujethra Vasu1, William C Little2, Timothy M Morgan3, Richard B Stacey4, William O Ntim5, Craig Hamilton6, Vinay Thohan7, Caroline Chiles8, William Gregory Hundley9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dobutamine associated left ventricular (LV) wall motion analyses exhibit reduced sensitivity for detecting inducible ischemia in individuals with increased LV wall thickness. This study was performed to better understand the mechanism of this reduced sensitivity in the elderly who often manifest increased LV wall thickness and risk factors for coronary artery disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25885436 PMCID: PMC4389511 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-015-0131-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Figure 1Discordance between left ventricular wall motion abnormalities and perfusion defects indicative of inducible myocardial ischemia. Cine white blood imaging end-diastolic (left panel) and end-systolic (middle panel) frames from slice position acquired in the middle of the left ventricle at peak dobutamine and atropine infusion administered to achieve >80% of the maximum predicted heart rate response for age. The white arrows indicate normal wall motion of the posterior and lateral wall segments. However, in the right panel, a first pass gadolinium enhanced perfusion image also acquired at peak stress is displayed. The yellow arrows indicate a hypoperfused region of the LV myocardium consistent with inducible ischemia. This participant underwent contrast coronary angiography which demonstrated a >70% stenosis of the saphenous vein graft to the right coronary artery.
Demographic data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 68 ± 8 | 70 ± 9 | 69 ± 8 | 0.32 |
| Men (%) | 110 (47%) | 14 (50%) | 14 (78%) | 0.046 |
| Race/Ethnicity | 0.50 | |||
| Caucasian | 171 (74%) | 23 (82%) | 16 (89%) | |
| African Am. | 56 (24%) | 4 (14%) | 2 (11%) | |
| Hispanic | 2 (1%) | 1 (4%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Asian | 3 (1%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Body mass index (m/kg2) | 30.4 (6.5) | 30.3 (4.8) | 32.1 (5.4) | 0.54 |
| Hypertension | 203 (88%) | 27 (96%) | 16 (89%) | 0.38 |
| Coronary artery disease | 57 (25%) | 9 (32%) | 8 (44%) | 0.14 |
| Prior MI | 16 (7%) | 5 (17%) | 3 (18%) | 0.05 |
| Prior revascularization (PCI or CABG) | 31 (13%) | 9 (32%) | 8 (44%) | <0.001 |
| Diabetes | 94 (41%) | 11 (39%) | 8 (44%) | 0.94 |
| Hypercholesterolemia | 152 (70%) | 22 (79%) | 12 (86%) | 0.30 |
| Smoking | 90 (42%) | 10 (36%) | 6 (43%) | 0.79 |
| Medications | ||||
| Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor | 99 (43%) | 15 (54%) | 7 (39%) | 0.52 |
| Angiotensin receptor blocker | 64 (30%) | 5 (18%) | 3 (20%) | 0.30 |
| Statin | 152 (66%) | 21 (75%) | 14 (78%) | 0.37 |
| Beta blocker | 99 (43%) | 13 (46%) | 11 (61%) | 0.32 |
| Calcium channel antagonist | 68 (30%) | 8 (29%) | 9 (50%) | 0.20 |
*Analysis of variance test of equality of three groups. Summary statistics are mean (standard error) for continuous variables and frequency (%) for categorical variables. Abbreviations: CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting; LV, left ventricular; MI, myocardial infarction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.
Hemodynamics and CMR indices
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Heart rate (beats/min.) | 65 (0.74)** | 63.64 (2.06) | 65.73 (2.81) | 0.77 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 139.81 (1.18) | 137.29 (3.29) | 136.67 (4.58) | 0.64 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 79.53 (0.82) | 75.29 (2.29) | 78.80 (3.13) | 0.22 |
| Mean arterial pressure (mmHg) | 99.58 (0.82) | 95.95 (2.27) | 98.09 (3.21) | 0.30 |
| Rate pressure product | 9108 (133) | 8753 (369) | 8962 (504) | 0.65 |
| Left ventricular end diastolic volume index (ml/m2) | 62.2 (1.01) | 56.7 (2.81) | 59.3 (3.91) | 0.17 |
| Left ventricular end systolic volume index (ml/m2) | 22.2 (0.52) | 21.3 (1.31) | 22.8 (1.72) | 0.72 |
| Left ventricular stroke volume index (ml/m2) | 39.4 (0.61) | 35.5 (1.52) | 36.5 (2.11) | 0.03 |
| Ejection fraction (%) | 64.2 (0.51) | 62.7 (1.41) | 62.5 (1.82) | 0.46 |
| Cardiac index (ml/min/m2) | 2536 (39) | 2239 (109) | 2380 (149) | 0.03 |
| Pulse wave velocity (m/s) | 11 (0.47) | 9.75 (1.28) | 9.96 (1.75) | 0.76 |
| Left ventricular mass index (gm/m2) | 66 (14) | 65.9 (11.32) | 71.1 (12.41) | 0.35 |
| Left ventricular concentricity | 1.09 (0.02) | 1.19 (0.05) | 1.26 (0.07) | 0.02 |
|
| ||||
| Peak heart rate (beats/min.) | 127 (1.12) | 129.81 (3.16) | 126.92 (4.39) | 0.63 |
| Peak systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 130 (1.75) | 126.37 (4.92) | 131.93 (6.84) | 0.74 |
| Peak diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 70.79 (1.21) | 68.04 (3.40) | 75.14 (4.72) | 0.47 |
| Peak mean arterial pressure (mmHg) | 90.57 (1.27) | 87.48 (3.58) | 94.07 (4.97) | 0.54 |
| Peak rate pressure product | 16400 (251) | 16381 (706) | 16804 (1982) | 0.92 |
| Left ventricular end diastolic volume index (ml/m2) | 51.60 (0.78) | 50.99 (2.15) | 54.97 (2.98) | 0.52 |
| Left ventricular end systolic volume index (ml/m2) | 13.68 (0.33) | 14.53 (0.87) | 18.36 (1.24) | 0.001 |
| Left ventricular stroke volume index (SVI) (ml/m2) | 37.85 (0.62) | 36.23 (1.69) | 36.64 (2.35) | 0.61 |
| Ejection fraction (%) | 73.3 (0.50) | 71.2 (1.42) | 66.5 (1.93) | 0.002 |
| Cardiac index (l/min/m2) | 4800 (83) | 4688 (232) | 4644 (316) | 0.82 |
| Pulse wave velocity (m/s) | 11.51 (0.61) | 12.44 (1.69) | 16.27 (2.39) | 0.14 |
*Analysis of variance test of equality of three groups. The p-values presented are an overall test that the three groups are equal. Abbreviations:, EDV, End diastolic volume; EF, Ejection fraction; PVA, Pressure volume area; PWV, Pulse wave velocity; SW, Stroke work.
Figure 2Concordance between left ventricular wall motion abnormalities and perfusion defects indicative of inducible myocardial ischemia. Cine white blood imaging end-diastolic (left panel) and end-systolic (middle panel) frames from slice position acquired in the apex of the left ventricle at peak dobutamine and atropine infusion administered to achieve >80% of the maximum predicted heart rate response for age. The white arrows indicate a wall motion abnormality in the inferoseptum as manifest by incomplete LV cavity obliteration at peak stress. In the right panel, a first pass gadolinium enhanced perfusion image also acquired at peak stress is displayed. The yellow arrows indicate a hypoperfused region of the LV myocardium consistent with inducible ischemia. In this case there was concordance of the wall motion and perfusion analyses both indicating inducible ischemia.
Figure 3Resting measures of myocardial oxygen demand between the three groups. The mean ± the standard error of the myocardial oxygen demand (Y-axis) and the number of participants in each of the 3 study groups (X-axis) are shown. The myocardial stroke work is denoted by the gray bars, and the pressure volume area is denoted by the black bars. At rest, Group II participants (wall motion negative, perfusion positive) have lower myocardial oxygen demand as assessed by myocardial stroke work (SW) than those in III (wall motion and perfusion positive) or Group I. Also, PVA is reduced in Groups II relative to Group I and trends toward a difference with Group III.
Figure 4Adjusted and unadjusted measures of myocardial oxygen demand. A shows the unadjusted differences in myocardial oxygen demand with stress, specifically the PVA, between Groups II and II. The differences in the unadjusted PVA between Groups II and III are attenuated when adjusted for LV preload (LV End-diastolic volume (LVEDV)) and LV concentricity, but persist when adjusted for LV afterload (Aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) and LV contractility (LV ejection fraction (LVEF). B demonstrates the differences in Stroke work between Groups II and III. Similar to PVA, LV Preload and Concentricity determine the differences in the Stroke Work between Groups II and III, but not the LV afterload or contractility. A and B show the attenuation of these differences when adjusted for LV preload and concentricity respectively. This suggests that LV preload and concentricity are the main factors influencing myocardial oxygen demand.