Vidhya Kumar1, Kevin E McElhanon2, James K Min3, Xin He4, Zhaobin Xu1, Eric X Beck1, Orlando P Simonetti1, Noah Weisleder2, Subha V Raman5. 1. The Ohio State University Davis Heart and Lung Research Institute, 473 W. 12th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. 2. The Ohio State University Davis Heart and Lung Research Institute, 473 W. 12th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA; OSU Department of Physiology and Cell Biology, 473 W. 12th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. 3. Dalio Institute for Cardiovascular Imaging, Weill-Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY 10021, USA. 4. University of Maryland School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College Park, MD 20742, USA. 5. The Ohio State University Davis Heart and Lung Research Institute, 473 W. 12th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. Electronic address: raman.1@osu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimation of diffuse myocardial fibrosis, substrate for adverse events such as heart failure and arrhythmias in patients with various cardiac disorders, is presently done by histopathology or cardiac magnetic resonance. We sought to develop a non-contrast method to estimate the amount of diffuse myocardial fibrosis leveraging dual energy computed tomography (DECT) in phantoms and a suitable small animal model. METHODS AND RESULTS: Phantoms consisted of homogenized bovine myocardium with varying amounts of Type 1 collagen. Fifteen mice underwent sham surgery, no procedure, or transverse aortic constriction (TAC) for 5 or 8 weeks to produce moderate or severe fibrosis, respectively. Phantoms and ex vivo mouse hearts were imaged on a single source, DECT scanner equipped with kVp switching. Monochromatic images were reconstructed at 40-140 keV. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) was performed on mean myocardial CT numbers derived from single energy (70 keV) images as well as images reconstructed across multiple energies. Classification of myocardial fibrosis severity as low, moderate or severe was more often correct using the multi-energy CT/LDA approach vs. single energy CT/LDA in both phantoms (80.0% vs. 70.0%) and mice (93.3% vs. 33.3%). CONCLUSIONS: DECT myocardial imaging with multi-energy analysis better classifies myocardial fibrosis severity compared to a single energy-based approach. Non-contrast DECT can accurately and non-invasively estimate the extent of diffuse myocardial fibrosis in phantom and animal models. These data support further evaluation of this approach for in vivo myocardial fibrosis estimation.
BACKGROUND: Estimation of diffuse myocardial fibrosis, substrate for adverse events such as heart failure and arrhythmias in patients with various cardiac disorders, is presently done by histopathology or cardiac magnetic resonance. We sought to develop a non-contrast method to estimate the amount of diffuse myocardial fibrosis leveraging dual energy computed tomography (DECT) in phantoms and a suitable small animal model. METHODS AND RESULTS: Phantoms consisted of homogenized bovine myocardium with varying amounts of Type 1 collagen. Fifteen mice underwent sham surgery, no procedure, or transverse aortic constriction (TAC) for 5 or 8 weeks to produce moderate or severe fibrosis, respectively. Phantoms and ex vivo mouse hearts were imaged on a single source, DECT scanner equipped with kVp switching. Monochromatic images were reconstructed at 40-140 keV. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) was performed on mean myocardial CT numbers derived from single energy (70 keV) images as well as images reconstructed across multiple energies. Classification of myocardial fibrosis severity as low, moderate or severe was more often correct using the multi-energy CT/LDA approach vs. single energy CT/LDA in both phantoms (80.0% vs. 70.0%) and mice (93.3% vs. 33.3%). CONCLUSIONS: DECT myocardial imaging with multi-energy analysis better classifies myocardial fibrosis severity compared to a single energy-based approach. Non-contrast DECT can accurately and non-invasively estimate the extent of diffuse myocardial fibrosis in phantom and animal models. These data support further evaluation of this approach for in vivo myocardial fibrosis estimation.
Authors: Marcelo Souto Nacif; Nadine Kawel; Jason J Lee; Xinjian Chen; Jianhua Yao; Anna Zavodni; Christopher T Sibley; João A C Lima; Songtao Liu; David A Bluemke Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-07-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Peter Lamb; Dushyant V Sahani; Jorge M Fuentes-Orrego; Manuel Patino; Asish Ghosh; Paulo R S Mendonça Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Yoo Jin Hong; Tai Kyung Kim; Donghyun Hong; Chul Hwan Park; Sae Jong Yoo; Mary Ellen Wickum; Jin Hur; Hye-Jeong Lee; Young Jin Kim; Young Joo Suh; Andreas Greiser; Mun Young Paek; Byoung Wook Choi Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-05-25
Authors: Silvia G Priori; Carina Blomström-Lundqvist; Andrea Mazzanti; Nico Blom; Martin Borggrefe; John Camm; Perry Mark Elliott; Donna Fitzsimons; Robert Hatala; Gerhard Hindricks; Paulus Kirchhof; Keld Kjeldsen; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Antonio Hernandez-Madrid; Nikolaos Nikolaou; Tone M Norekvål; Christian Spaulding; Dirk J Van Veldhuisen Journal: G Ital Cardiol (Rome) Date: 2016-02
Authors: Colin J Yi; Colin O Wu; Michael Tee; Chia-Ying Liu; Gustavo J Volpe; Martin R Prince; Gregory W Hundley; Antoinette S Gomes; Rob J van der Geest; Susan Heckbert; João A Lima; David A Bluemke Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Steve Bandula; Steven K White; Andrew S Flett; David Lawrence; Francesca Pugliese; Michael T Ashworth; Shonit Punwani; Stuart A Taylor; James C Moon Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-07-22 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ankur Gulati; Andrew Jabbour; Tevfik F Ismail; Kaushik Guha; Jahanzaib Khwaja; Sadaf Raza; Kishen Morarji; Tristan D H Brown; Nizar A Ismail; Marc R Dweck; Elisa Di Pietro; Michael Roughton; Ricardo Wage; Yousef Daryani; Rory O'Hanlon; Mary N Sheppard; Francisco Alpendurada; Alexander R Lyon; Stuart A Cook; Martin R Cowie; Ravi G Assomull; Dudley J Pennell; Sanjay K Prasad Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Matthias Pumberger; Michael Fuchs; Nils Engelhard; Kay Geert Hermann; Michael Putzier; Marcus R Makowski; Bernd Hamm; Torsten Diekhoff Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 5.315