Michael Markl1, Daniel C Lee, Jason Ng, Maria Carr, James Carr, Jeffrey J Goldberger. 1. From the *Department of Radiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago; †Department of Biomedical Engineering, McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston; ‡Division of Cardiology, §Feinberg Cardiovascular Research Institute, and ∥Center for Cardiovascular Innovation, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Left atrial (LA) 4-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to derive anatomic maps of LA stasis, peak velocity, and time-to-peak (TTP) velocity in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and to identify relationships between LA flow with LA volume and patient characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four-dimensional flow MRI for the in vivo assessment of time-resolved 3-dimensional LA blood flow velocities was performed in 111 subjects: 42 patients with a history of AF and in sinus rhythm (AF-sinus), 39 patients with persistent AF (AF-afib), 10 young healthy volunteers (HVs), and 20 age-appropriate controls (CTRL). Data analysis included the 3-dimensional segmentation of the LA and the calculation of LA stasis, peak velocity, and TTP maps. Regional LA flow dynamics were quantified by calculating mean stasis, peak velocity, and TTP in the LA center region and the region adjacent to the LA wall. RESULTS: A sensitivity analysis identified thresholds for global LA stasis (<0.1 m/s) and peak velocity (top 5% LA velocities), which detected significant differences between AF patients and controls for global LA stasis (HV, 25% ± 5%; CTRL, 29% ± 10%; AF-sinus, 41% ± 13%; AF-afib, 52% ± 17%) and peak velocity (HV, 0.43 ± 0.02 m/s; CTRL, 0.37 ± 0.04 m/s; AF-sinus, 0.33 ± 0.05 m/s; AF-afib, 0.30 ± 0.05 m/s). Regional analysis revealed significantly increased stasis at both LA center and wall for AF patients compared with age-appropriate controls (29%-84% difference, P < 0.006) and for AF-afib versus AF-sinus patients (22%-30% difference, P < 0.004). In addition, stasis close to the LA wall was significantly elevated (P < 0.001) compared with the LA center for all subject groups. Multiple regressions revealed significant (RAdj = 0.45-0.50, P < 0.001) relationships between impaired global LA flow (reduced velocity and increased stasis) with age (|β| = 0.27-0.50, P < 0.002) and LA volume (|β| = 0.26-0.50, P < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Atrial 4-dimensional flow MRI detected changes in global and regional LA flow dynamics associated with AF, age, and LA volume. Longitudinal studies are needed to test the diagnostic value of LA flow metrics as potential risk factors for thromboembolic events.
OBJECTIVES: Left atrial (LA) 4-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to derive anatomic maps of LA stasis, peak velocity, and time-to-peak (TTP) velocity in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and to identify relationships between LA flow with LA volume and patient characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four-dimensional flow MRI for the in vivo assessment of time-resolved 3-dimensional LA blood flow velocities was performed in 111 subjects: 42 patients with a history of AF and in sinus rhythm (AF-sinus), 39 patients with persistent AF (AF-afib), 10 young healthy volunteers (HVs), and 20 age-appropriate controls (CTRL). Data analysis included the 3-dimensional segmentation of the LA and the calculation of LA stasis, peak velocity, and TTP maps. Regional LA flow dynamics were quantified by calculating mean stasis, peak velocity, and TTP in the LA center region and the region adjacent to the LA wall. RESULTS: A sensitivity analysis identified thresholds for global LA stasis (<0.1 m/s) and peak velocity (top 5% LA velocities), which detected significant differences between AFpatients and controls for global LA stasis (HV, 25% ± 5%; CTRL, 29% ± 10%; AF-sinus, 41% ± 13%; AF-afib, 52% ± 17%) and peak velocity (HV, 0.43 ± 0.02 m/s; CTRL, 0.37 ± 0.04 m/s; AF-sinus, 0.33 ± 0.05 m/s; AF-afib, 0.30 ± 0.05 m/s). Regional analysis revealed significantly increased stasis at both LA center and wall for AFpatients compared with age-appropriate controls (29%-84% difference, P < 0.006) and for AF-afib versus AF-sinuspatients (22%-30% difference, P < 0.004). In addition, stasis close to the LA wall was significantly elevated (P < 0.001) compared with the LA center for all subject groups. Multiple regressions revealed significant (RAdj = 0.45-0.50, P < 0.001) relationships between impaired global LA flow (reduced velocity and increased stasis) with age (|β| = 0.27-0.50, P < 0.002) and LA volume (|β| = 0.26-0.50, P < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Atrial 4-dimensional flow MRI detected changes in global and regional LA flow dynamics associated with AF, age, and LA volume. Longitudinal studies are needed to test the diagnostic value of LA flow metrics as potential risk factors for thromboembolic events.
Authors: M E Goldman; L A Pearce; R G Hart; M Zabalgoitia; R W Asinger; R Safford; J L Halperin Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: R W Asinger; J Koehler; L A Pearce; M Zabalgoitia; J L Blackshear; P E Fenster; R Strauss; D Hess; G D Pennock; R M Rothbart; J L Halperin Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: P G Walker; G B Cranney; M B Scheidegger; G Waseleski; G M Pohost; A P Yoganathan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1993 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Aakash N Gupta; Gilles Soulat; Ryan Avery; Bradley D Allen; Jeremy D Collins; Lubna Choudhury; Robert O Bonow; James Carr; Michael Markl; Mohammed S M Elbaz Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Michael Markl; Daniel C Lee; Nicholas Furiasse; Maria Carr; Charles Foucar; Jason Ng; James Carr; Jeffrey J Goldberger Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: M Markl; S Schnell; C Wu; E Bollache; K Jarvis; A J Barker; J D Robinson; C K Rigsby Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Michael Markl; Maria Carr; Jason Ng; Daniel C Lee; Kelly Jarvis; James Carr; Jeffrey J Goldberger Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-01-28 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Liliana Ma; Jérôme Yerly; Lorenzo Di Sopra; Davide Piccini; Jeesoo Lee; Amanda DiCarlo; Rod Passman; Philip Greenland; Daniel Kim; Matthias Stuber; Michael Markl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Vivian P Kamphuis; Jos J M Westenberg; Roel L F van der Palen; Nico A Blom; Albert de Roos; Rob van der Geest; Mohammed S M Elbaz; Arno A W Roest Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 2.357