INTRODUCTION: We assessed the potential of CT strain to detect changes in myocardial function in patients referred for TAVI pre and post intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 25 consecutive patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis in whom TAVI had been performed were included in this analysis. Functional CT data sets acquired before and 3 to 6 months after TAVI were available. Multiphase reconstructions in increments of 10% of the cardiac cycle were rendered and transferred to a dedicated workstation (Ziostation2, Ziosoft Inc., Tokyo, Japan). For quantification of left ventricular strain, multiplanar reconstructions of the left ventricle in standard 4 chamber, 2 chamber as well as apical 3 chamber views were rendered. The perimeter of the left ventricle was traced dynamically through the cardiac cycle. Peak strain was calculated for each patient pre and post intervention. Furthermore, for quantification of 3-dimensional maximum principal strain, 2 volumetric regions of interests (VOI) were placed per each basal, mid and apical segment of the previously mentioned MPRs and peak maximal principal strain was calculated. Maximum principal strain as well as perimeter-derived longitudinal strain values in the three standard windows were averaged to obtain global strain. RESULTS: 25 patients were included in this analysis (mean age 78 ± 9 years, 13 males). Peak global maximum principal strain was significantly higher at follow-up compared to baseline (0.46 ± 0.19 vs. 0.59 ± 0.18, respectively, p = 0.001). Similarly global longitudinal strain derived by perimeter was significantly lower - implying better contraction - compared to baseline (-8.6% ± 2.8% vs. -9.8% ± 2.6%, respectively, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Using dedicated software, assessment of CT derived left ventricular strain is feasible. In patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement, CT-derived parameters of global myocardial strain improve onshort-term follow-up.
INTRODUCTION: We assessed the potential of CT strain to detect changes in myocardial function in patients referred for TAVI pre and post intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 25 consecutive patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis in whom TAVI had been performed were included in this analysis. Functional CT data sets acquired before and 3 to 6 months after TAVI were available. Multiphase reconstructions in increments of 10% of the cardiac cycle were rendered and transferred to a dedicated workstation (Ziostation2, Ziosoft Inc., Tokyo, Japan). For quantification of left ventricular strain, multiplanar reconstructions of the left ventricle in standard 4 chamber, 2 chamber as well as apical 3 chamber views were rendered. The perimeter of the left ventricle was traced dynamically through the cardiac cycle. Peak strain was calculated for each patient pre and post intervention. Furthermore, for quantification of 3-dimensional maximum principal strain, 2 volumetric regions of interests (VOI) were placed per each basal, mid and apical segment of the previously mentioned MPRs and peak maximal principal strain was calculated. Maximum principal strain as well as perimeter-derived longitudinal strain values in the three standard windows were averaged to obtain global strain. RESULTS: 25 patients were included in this analysis (mean age 78 ± 9 years, 13 males). Peak global maximum principal strain was significantly higher at follow-up compared to baseline (0.46 ± 0.19 vs. 0.59 ± 0.18, respectively, p = 0.001). Similarly global longitudinal strain derived by perimeter was significantly lower - implying better contraction - compared to baseline (-8.6% ± 2.8% vs. -9.8% ± 2.6%, respectively, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Using dedicated software, assessment of CT derived left ventricular strain is feasible. In patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement, CT-derived parameters of global myocardial strain improve onshort-term follow-up.
Authors: Gilberto J Aquino; Josua A Decker; U Joseph Schoepf; Landin Carson; Namrata Paladugu; Basel Yacoub; Verena Brandt; Anna Lena Emrich; Florian Schwarz; Jeremy R Burt; Richard Bayer; Akos Varga-Szemes; Tilman Emrich Journal: Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging Date: 2022-06-30
Authors: Allard T van den Hoven; Sultan Yilmazer; Raluca G Chelu; Roderick W J van Grootel; Savine C S Minderhoud; Lidia R Bons; An M van Berendoncks; Anthonie L Duijnhouwer; Hans-Marc J Siebelink; Annemien E van den Bosch; Ricardo P J Budde; Jolien W Roos-Hesselink; Alexander Hirsch Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Marius Vach; Johanna Vogelhuber; Marcel Weber; Alois M Sprinkart; Claus C Pieper; Wolfgang Block; Daniel Kuetting; Ulrike I Attenberger; Julian A Luetkens Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Borbála Vattay; Anikó Ilona Nagy; Astrid Apor; Márton Kolossváry; Aristomenis Manouras; Milán Vecsey-Nagy; Levente Molnár; Melinda Boussoussou; Andrea Bartykowszki; Ádám L Jermendy; Tímea Kováts; Emese Zsarnóczay; Pál Maurovich-Horvat; Béla Merkely; Bálint Szilveszter Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-04-25
Authors: Emilija Miskinyte; Paulius Bucius; Jennifer Erley; Seyedeh Mahsa Zamani; Radu Tanacli; Christian Stehning; Christopher Schneeweis; Tomas Lapinskas; Burkert Pieske; Volkmar Falk; Rolf Gebker; Gianni Pedrizzetti; Natalia Solowjowa; Sebastian Kelle Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-09-10 Impact factor: 4.241