| Literature DB >> 28768519 |
Frank J Raucci1,2, David A Parra3,4, Jason T Christensen3,4, Lazaro E Hernandez5, Larry W Markham3,4, Meng Xu6, James C Slaughter6, Jonathan H Soslow3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extracellular volume fraction (ECV) is altered in pathological cardiac remodeling and predicts death and arrhythmia. ECV can be quantified using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping but calculation requires a measured hematocrit (Hct). The longitudinal relaxation of blood has been used in adults to generate a synthetic Hct (estimate of true Hct) but has not been validated in pediatric populations.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiomyopathy; Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Extracellular volume fraction; Modified look-locker inversion (MOLLI); T1 mapping
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28768519 PMCID: PMC5541652 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-017-0377-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Patient characteristics
|
| Portion or Range | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 16.4 ± 6.4 | (7.4, 47.7) |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 145 | (89%) |
| Female | 18 | (11%) |
| BSA (m2) | 1.61 ± 0.39 | (0.77, 2.62) |
| Heart Rate (bpm) | 93 ± 21 | (45, 150) |
| LVEF (%) | 59 ± 9 | (24, 84) |
| LV EDVI (ml/m2) | 70.6 ± 26.9 | (29.4208.6) |
| LV ESVI (ml/m2) | 29.6 ± 18.4 | (7.9, 153.7) |
| Same Day Hct | ||
| Yes | 146 | (90%) |
| No | 17 | (10%) |
| Primary Diagnosis | ||
| Congenital | ||
| Arch abnormalities | 5 | (3%) |
| Aortic valve anomalies | 7 | (4%) |
| ASD | 1 | (0.6%) |
| AVSD | 2 | (1.2%) |
| Mitral valve anomalies | 1 | (0.6%) |
| Pulmonary valve anomalies | 5 | (3%) |
| ToF | 4 | (2.5%) |
| Tricuspid anomalies | 1 | (0.6%) |
| VSD | 2 | (1.2%) |
| DILV | 1 | (0.6%) |
| DORV | 1 | (0.6%) |
| CCTGA | 1 | (0.6%) |
| D-TGA | 1 | (0.6%) |
| Other | 2 | (1.2%) |
| Total | 24 | (15%) |
| Secondary/Acquired | ||
| Arrhythmia | 2 | (1.2%) |
| Cardiomyopathy | 11 | (7%) |
| Chemotherapy | 6 | (4%) |
| Kawasaki Disease | 1 | (0.6%) |
| Muscular Dystrophy | 86 | (53%) |
| Myocarditis | 9 | (5%) |
| Other acquired | 4 | (3%) |
| Total | 119 | (73%) |
| Normal/Control | 18 | (11%) |
BSA = Body surface area; LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction; LV EDVI = left ventricular end-diastolic volume indexed; LV EDSI = left ventricular end-systolic volume indexed; ASD = atrial septal defect; AVSD = atrioventricular septal defect; ToF = tetralogy of Fallot; VSD = ventricular septal defect; DILV = double inlet left ventricle; DORV = double outlet right ventricle; CCTGA = congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries; D-TGA = D-transposition of the great arteries
Comparison of measured to synthetic Hct and ECV for each regression fit
| Mean ± SD | Range | |
|---|---|---|
| Measured Hct (%) | 41.8 ± 3.4 | (32, 56) |
| Synthetic Hctpublished (%) | 44.0 ± 3.7 | (37.6, 59.1) |
| Synthetic Hctlocal (%) | 41.8 ± 1.4 | (39.5, 57.3) |
| Measured ECV Mid-septum (%) | 29.5 ± 3.9 | (20.8, 46.2) |
| Synthetic ECVpublished Mid-septum (%) | 28.4 ± 3.7 | (20.6, 45.7) |
| Synthetic ECVlocal Mid-septum (%) | 29.5 ± 3.6 | (21.2, 46.2) |
| Synthetic ECVstatic Mid-septum (%) | 27.9 ± 3.5 | (19.9, 43.1) |
| Measured ECV Mid-free wall (%) | 30.5 ± 4.8 | (20.1, 45.9) |
| Synthetic ECVpublished Mid-free wall (%) | 29.3 ± 4.7 | (20.2, 42.5) |
| Synthetic ECVlocal Mid-free wall (%) | 29.7 ± 4.6 | (19.6, 41.7) |
| Synthetic ECVstatic Mid-free wall (%) | 28.8 ± 4.4 | (17.8, 41.4) |
Fig. 1Linear regression fit of measured vs synthetic Hct and ECV for published model. Poor regression fit to the published model (a) with a bias of 2.2% on Bland-Altman analysis (b). However at the mid-free wall, the regression fit for ECV is substantially better (c) with an expected inverse bias on Bland-Altman analysis due to the bias seen in the Hct (d). Dashed line in A and C represents line of identity. For Bland-Altman plots, solid line represents mean difference and dashed lines (B and D) are ±1.96SD
Fig. 2Linear Regression for native T1 blood pool vs measured Hct. The local model was derived from linear regression of the blood pool native T1 (R1) and measured Hct
Fig. 3Linear regression fit of measured vs synthetic Hct and ECV for local model. Similarly poor regression fit using the local model (a) with elimination of bias on Bland-Altman analysis (b). There was a tendency for the local equation to overestimate Hct at higher values and underestimate Hct at lower values. However there was excellent fit for measured vs synthetic ECV at the mid-free wall (c) without significant bias on Bland-Altman analysis (d). Dashed line in A and C represents line of identity. For Bland-Altman plots, solid line represents mean difference and dashed lines (B and D) are ±1.96SD
Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the three models
| Published Model | Static Hct (Partition Coefficient) | Local Model | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Hctall ( | 0.40 | [0.27, 0.52] | --- | --- | 0.28 | [0.13, 0.42] |
| Hctsame day ( | 0.43 | [0.29, 0.56] | --- | --- | 0.32 | [0.17, 0.46] |
| Hctcontrol ( | 0.54 | [0.12, 0.80] | --- | --- | 0.25 | [−0.23, 0.63] |
| HctDMD ( | 0.38 | [0.18. 0.54] | --- | --- | 0.27 | [0.07, 0.46] |
| Hctcongenital ( | 0.33 | [−0.07, 0.64] | --- | --- | 0.31 | [−0.10, 0.63] |
| ECVall mid-septum ( | 0.85 | [0.80, 0.89] | 0.89 | [0.85, 0.92] | 0.91 | [0.88, 0.93] |
| ECVsame day mid-septum ( | 0.83 | [0.77, 0.88] | 0.88 | [0.84, 0.91] | 0.90 | [0.87, 0.93] |
| ECVcontrol mid-septum ( | 0.94 | [0.85, 0.98] | 0.88 | [0.69, 0.95] | 0.92 | [0.79, 0.97] |
| ECVDMD mid-septum ( | 0.86 | [0.81, 0.91] | 0.92 | [0.87, 0.95] | 0.93 | [0.89, 0.95] |
| ECVcongenital mid-septum ( | 0.82 | [0.63, 0.92] | 0.86 | [0.71, 0.94] | 0.89 | [0.76, 0.95] |
| ECVall mid-free wall ( | 0.93 | [0.91, 0.95] | 0.92 | [0.89, 0.94] | 0.93 | [0.91, 0.95] |
| ECVsame day mid-free wall ( | 0.90 | [0.87, 0.93] | 0.92 | [0.89, 0.94] | 0.94 | [0.92, 0.96] |
| ECVcontrol mid-free wall ( | 0.97 | [0.93, 0.99] | 0.94 | [0.84, 0.98] | 0.96 | [0.90, 0.99] |
| ECVDMD mid-free wall ( | 0.89 | [0.84, 0.93] | 0.94 | [0.90, 0.96] | 0.94 | [0.92, 0.96] |
| ECVcongenital mid-free wall ( | 0.83 | [0.64, 0.92] | 0.85 | [0.68, 0.93] | 0.88 | [0.73, 0.94] |
ICCs for Hct in the entire cohort (Hctall) as well as subsets of controls, DMD patients, and patients with congenital heart disease were all higher for the published model compared to the local model, though the confidence intervals suggest the differences may not be significant. There was no significant difference in ICCs between these subgroups for either model. The ICCs for ECVmid-septum and ECVmid-free wall for all three models were comparably strong, with the local model marginally better for the overall cohort. ICCs were not significantly different when calculated with or without same day Hct sub-group included
Clinical miscategorization of abnormal ECV in the three models
| Published Model | Static ECV | Local Model | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECVmid-septum | ECVmid-free wall | ECVmid-septum | ECVmid-free wall | ECVmid-septum | ECVmid-free wall | |
| False Negative | 41 (30) | 26 (19) | 34 (32) | 26 (24) | 14 (9) | 12 (6) |
| False Positive | 4 (8) | 3 (2) | 3 (3) | 1 (2) | 12 (11) | 8 (6) |
| Both false negative | 14 (9) | 12 (12) | 6 (2) | |||
| Both false positive | 1 (0) | 1 (0) | 3 (3) | |||
| Total unique miscategorizations | 59 (50) | 51 (49) | 37 (27) | |||
Using a threshold ECV of 28.5% for abnormal (3 SD), the number of false negatives and false positives were determined for each model
The local model had substantially fewer total miscategorizations, although at the expense of an increased frequency of false positives. Numbers in parentheses are the number of instances in each classification using a threshold of 27.0% (2 SD)