Ify R Mordi1, Satnam Singh2, Amelia Rudd2, Janaki Srinivasan2, Michael Frenneaux2, Nikolaos Tzemos3, Dana K Dawson4. 1. Division of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom. 2. School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom. 3. Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom. 4. School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom. Electronic address: dana.dawson@abdn.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of a comprehensive imaging protocol including echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance in the diagnosis and differentiation of hypertensive heart disease and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). BACKGROUND: Hypertension is present in up to 90% of patients with HFpEF and is a major etiological component. Despite current recommendations and diagnostic criteria for HFpEF, no noninvasive imaging technique has as yet shown the ability to identify any structural differences between patients with hypertensive heart disease and HFpEF. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study of 112 well-characterized patients (62 with HFpEF, 22 with hypertension, and 28 healthy control subjects). All patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise and biomarker testing and an imaging protocol including echocardiography with speckle-tracking analysis and cardiac magnetic resonance including T1 mapping pre- and post-contrast. RESULTS: Echocardiographic global longitudinal strain (GLS) and extracellular volume (ECV) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance were the only variables able to independently stratify among the 3 groups of patients. ECV was the best technique for differentiation between hypertensive heart disease and HFpEF (ECV area under the curve: 0.88; GLS area under the curve: 0.78; p < 0.001 for both). Using ECV, an optimal cutoff of 31.2% gave 100% sensitivity and 75% specificity. ECV was significantly higher and GLS was significantly reduced in subjects with reduced exercise capacity (lower peak oxygen consumption and higher minute ventilation-carbon dioxide production) (p < 0.001 for both ECV and GLS). CONCLUSIONS: Both GLS and ECV are able to independently discriminate between hypertensive heart disease and HFpEF and identify patients with prognostically significant functional limitation. ECV is the best diagnostic discriminatory marker of HFpEF and could be used as a surrogate endpoint for therapeutic studies.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of a comprehensive imaging protocol including echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance in the diagnosis and differentiation of hypertensive heart disease and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). BACKGROUND:Hypertension is present in up to 90% of patients with HFpEF and is a major etiological component. Despite current recommendations and diagnostic criteria for HFpEF, no noninvasive imaging technique has as yet shown the ability to identify any structural differences between patients with hypertensive heart disease and HFpEF. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study of 112 well-characterized patients (62 with HFpEF, 22 with hypertension, and 28 healthy control subjects). All patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise and biomarker testing and an imaging protocol including echocardiography with speckle-tracking analysis and cardiac magnetic resonance including T1 mapping pre- and post-contrast. RESULTS: Echocardiographic global longitudinal strain (GLS) and extracellular volume (ECV) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance were the only variables able to independently stratify among the 3 groups of patients. ECV was the best technique for differentiation between hypertensive heart disease and HFpEF (ECV area under the curve: 0.88; GLS area under the curve: 0.78; p < 0.001 for both). Using ECV, an optimal cutoff of 31.2% gave 100% sensitivity and 75% specificity. ECV was significantly higher and GLS was significantly reduced in subjects with reduced exercise capacity (lower peak oxygen consumption and higher minute ventilation-carbon dioxide production) (p < 0.001 for both ECV and GLS). CONCLUSIONS: Both GLS and ECV are able to independently discriminate between hypertensive heart disease and HFpEF and identify patients with prognostically significant functional limitation. ECV is the best diagnostic discriminatory marker of HFpEF and could be used as a surrogate endpoint for therapeutic studies.
Authors: Francesco Sardanelli; Simone Schiaffino; Moreno Zanardo; Francesco Secchi; Paola Maria Cannaò; Federico Ambrogi; Giovanni Di Leo Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Giselle C Meléndez; Jennifer H Jordan; Ralph B D'Agostino; Edward J Lesnefsky; W Gregory Hundley Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Adrián I Löffler; Jonathan A Pan; Pelbreton C Balfour; Peter W Shaw; Yang Yang; Moiz Nasir; Daniel A Auger; Frederick H Epstein; Christopher M Kramer; Li-Ming Gan; Michael Salerno Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Stephen M Ratchford; Heather L Clifton; D Taylor La Salle; Ryan M Broxterman; Joshua F Lee; John J Ryan; Paul N Hopkins; Josephine B Wright; Joel D Trinity; Russell S Richardson; D Walter Wray Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2020-09-17
Authors: Erica Qiao; Kathan Amin; Daniel S Hippe; Eric V Krieger; Theodore J Dubinsky Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 2.357