| Literature DB >> 27473274 |
Dirkjan Kuijpers1,2, Niek H Prakken1, Rozemarijn Vliegenthart1, Paul R M van Dijkman2, Pim van der Harst3, Matthijs Oudkerk4.
Abstract
Caffeine intake before adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging may cause false negative findings. We hypothesized that the antagonistic effect of caffeine can be measured by T1 relaxation times in rest and adenosine stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), as T1 mapping techniques are sensitive to changes in myocardial blood volume. We prospectively analyzed 105 consecutive patients with adenosine stress perfusion CMR on a 1.5-T MRI system. Rest and stress T1 mapping was performed using Modified Look-Locker Inversion recovery. T1 reactivity was defined as difference in T1rest and T1stress (∆T1). Fifteen patients drank coffee within 4 h of CMR (<4H caffeine group), and 10 patients had coffee the day before (>8H caffeine group). Comparison was made to patients without self-reported coffee intake: 50 with normal CMR (control group), 18 with myocardial ischemia, and 12 with myocardial infarction. The national review board approved the study; all patients gave written informed consent. The <4H caffeine group showed inverted ∆T1 of -7.8 % (T1rest 975 ± 42 ms, T1stress 898 ± 51 ms, p < 0.0005). The >8H caffeine group showed reduced T1 reactivity (1.8 %; T1rest 979 ms, T1stress 997 ms) compared to the controls (4.3 %; T1rest 977 ± 40 ms, T1stress 1018 ± 40 ms), p < 0.0005. Ischemic and infarcted myocardium showed minimal T1 reactivity (0.2 and 0.3 %, respectively). Caffeine intake inverts the adenosine effect during stress perfusion CMR as measured by T1 mapping. T1 reactivity can assess the adequacy of adenosine-induced stress in perfusion CMR.Entities:
Keywords: Biomarkers; Caffeine; Cardiovascular MRI; T1-mapping
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27473274 PMCID: PMC5021723 DOI: 10.1007/s10554-016-0949-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging ISSN: 1569-5794 Impact factor: 2.357
Fig. 1Rest-stress T1 mapping analysis with adenosine perfusion CMR
Characteristics of study objects
| Controls | <4H caffeine | >8H caffeine | Patients with ischemia | Patients with infarct | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 10 | N = 18 | N = 12 | ||
| Male (%) | 44 | 53 | 40 | 61 | 92 | 0.008 |
| Age (years) | 67 ± 11 | 67 ± 11 | 61 ± 15 | 71 ± 11 | 69 ± 10 | 0.325 |
| Body weight (kg) | 75 ± 14 | 79 ± 14 | 91 ± 23 | 83 ± 13 | 87 ± 19 | 0.013 |
| History of PCI (%) | 2 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 17 | |
| History of CABG (%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | |
| Myocardial infarct age (months) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 ± 16 | |
| Resting heart rate, beats/min | 76 ± 15 | 70 ± 7 | 77 ± 20 | 72 ± 10 | 77 ± 18 | 0.732 |
| Stress heart rate, beats/min | 87 ± 14 | 81 ± 10 | 88 ± 19 | 81 ± 19 | 87 ± 17 | 0.601 |
| Increase in heart rate (%) | 14 | 16 | 15 | 12 | 14 | |
| Rest systolic blood pressure, mm Hg | 146 ± 28 | 144 ± 20 | 143 ± 28 | 150 ± 25 | 161 ± 20 | 0.287 |
| Rest diastolic blood pressure, mm Hg | 85 ± 19 | 83 ± 9 | 78 ± 7 | 79 ± 9 | 87 ± 12 | 0.351 |
| Stress systolic blood pressure, mm Hg | 141 ± 23 | 139 ± 15 | 137 ± 23 | 138 ± 40 | 144 ± 20 | 0.989 |
| Stress diastolic blood pressure, mm Hg | 80 ± 10 | 79 ± 7 | 74 ± 7 | 74 ± 13 | 82 ± 10 | 0.069 |
| Rest rate pressure product, mm Hg. beats/min | 11,213 | 10,165 | 11,296 | 10,851 | 12,522 | 0.450 |
| Stress rate pressure product, mm Hg. beats/min | 12,320 | 11,357 | 12,277 | 11,334 | 12,715 | 0.821 |
| Increase (%) | 9.9 | 11.7 | 8.7 | 4.4 | 1.5 |
Values are mean ± SD or percentages. Statistical difference between any of the groups tested by ANOVA testing.
PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, CABG coronary artery bypass grafting
T1 mapping values
| T1 mapping values | Controls | Coffee intake <4H | Coffee intake >8H | Patients with ischemia | Patients with infarct | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ischemic myocardium | Remote myocardium | Infarct myocardium | Remote myocardium | |||||
| N = 50 | N = 15 | N = 10 | N = 18 | N = 18 | N = 12 | N = 12 | ||
| T1 mapping value at rest, ms | 977 ± 40 | 975 ± 42 | 979 ± 37 | 979 ± 64 | 960 ± 44 | 1039 ± 49 | 988 ± 40 | 0.001 |
| T1 mapping value at stress, ms | 1018 ± 40 | 898 ± 51 | 997 ± 65 | 981 ± 61 | 985 ± 45 | 1042 ± 51 | 1018 ± 42 | <0.0005 |
| ∆ T1 (% stress response compared to rest) | 4.3 ± 2.8 % | −7.8 ± 5.0 | 1.8 ± 4.0 | 0.2 ± 0.7 | 2.6 ± 3.4 | 0.3 ± 0.4 | 3.1 ± 2.6 | <0.0005 |
Values are mean ± SD or percentages ± SD. Statistical difference between any of the groups tested by ANOVA testing
Fig. 2Myocardial T1 values at rest and during adenosine stress CMR
Fig. 3Comparison of T1 reactivity (∆T1) between the different patient groups
Fig. 4Comparison of T1 reactivity (∆T1) between ischemic, infarcted and remote myocardial tissue
Fig. 5Comparison of T1 values in ischemic and infarct area versus remote myocardial tissue (septum)