| Literature DB >> 30571379 |
Tor Skibsted Clemmensen1, Jens Soerensen2, Nils Henrik Hansson1, Lars Poulsen Tolbod2, Hendrik J Harms2, Hans Eiskjær1, Fabian Mikkelsen1, Henrik Wiggers1, Niels Frost Andersen3, Steen Hvitfeldt Poulsen1.
Abstract
Background This study evaluated myocardial oxygen consumption (MVO2) and myocardial external efficiency (MEE) in patients with cardiac amyloidosis (CA). Furthermore, we compared MEE and MVO2 in subjects with light chain amyloidosis versus transthyretin (ATTR) amyloidosis. Methods and Results The study population comprised 40 subjects: 25 patients with confirmed CA and 15 control subjects. All subjects underwent an 11C-acetate positron emission tomography. Furthermore, the CA patients underwent comprehensive echocardiography and right heart catheterization during a symptom-limited, semi-supine exercise test. MEE was calculated from 11C-acetate positron emission tomography as the ratio of left ventricular (LV) stroke work and the energy equivalent of MVO2. Myocardial work efficiency was calculated as echocardiography-derived work pressure product divided by three-dimensional LV mass. CA patients had significantly lower LV-ejection fraction (54±13% versus 63±4%, P<0.05) and LV-global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) (12±4% versus 19±2%, P<0.0001) and a more restrictive filling pattern (E/e'-ratio 18 [12-25] versus 8 [7-9], P<0.0001) than controls. MEE was severely reduced (13±5% versus 22±5%, P<0.0001) whereas total MVO2 was higher (18±6 mL/min versus 13±3 mL/min, P<0.01) in CA patients than controls. MEE decreased with increasing New York Heart Association symptom burden ( P<0.0001). We found a good relationship between MEE and peak exercise systolic performance (LVGLS: R2=0.60, P<0.0001; myocardial work efficiency: R2=0.48, P<0.0001; cardiac index: R2=0.52, P<0.0001) and between MEE and myocardial blood flow ( R2=0.44, P<0.0001). Conclusion Myocardial oxidative metabolism is disturbed in CA patients with increased total MVO2 and reduced MEE. MEE correlated significantly with echocardiographic derived systolic parameters such as myocardial work efficiency and LVGLS that might be used as surrogate MEE markers.Entities:
Keywords: amyloid; efficiency measures; exercise physiology; myocardial metabolism; myocardial oxygen consumption; positron emission tomography; speckle tracking echocardiography; stress echocardiography
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30571379 PMCID: PMC6404209 DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.009974
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Am Heart Assoc ISSN: 2047-9980 Impact factor: 5.501
Patient Characteristics
| Controls (n=10) | All CA Patients (n=25) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male, % | 30 | 80 | <0.01 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 26±4 | 25±3 | 0.30 |
| BSA, m2 | 2.0±0.2 | 1.9±0.2 | 0.45 |
| Age, y | 64 [62–66] | 69 [55–78] | 0.27 |
| NYHA functional class >I, % | 0 | 68 | <0.001 |
| Hypertension, % | 0 | 24 | 0.09 |
| Medication | |||
| Statins, % | 0 | 20 | 0.13 |
| ACE/Angiotensin II inhibitor, % | 0 | 24 | 0.09 |
| Beta blockers, % | 0 | 28 | 0.06 |
| Furosemide or bumetanide, % | 0 | 64 | 0.001 |
| Thiazide, % | 0 | 8 | 0.36 |
| Spironolactone, % | 0 | 16 | 0.18 |
| Biochemistry | |||
| Creatinine, μmol/L | 84 [72–92] | 106 [83–134] | <0.05 |
| Hemoglobin, mmol/L | 8.7±0.6 | 8.4±1.0 | 0.33 |
| NT‐ProBNP, ng/L | 33 [27–74] | 1962 [674–4268] | <0.0001 |
Data are presented as absolute number and present or mean±SD or median and interquartile range. ACE indicates acetylcholinesterase; BMI, body mass index; BSA, body surface area; NT‐ProBNP, N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide; NYHA, New York Heart Association.
Myocardial Function by Right Heart Catheterization and by Echocardiography in Cardiac Amyloidosis Patients
| Resting Conditions | Peak Exercise |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hemodynamics | |||
| MAP, mm Hg | 90±10 | 104±27 | <0.05 |
| HR, beats/min | 76±17 | 123±27 | <0.0001 |
| CI, L/min per m2 | 2.3±0.6 | 4.4±2.1 | <0.0001 |
| VO2, mL/min per kg | 301±89 | 1156±496 | <0.0001 |
| mRAP, mm Hg | 6.8±4.4 | 16±9 | <0.0001 |
| mPAP, mm Hg | 25±9 | 46±11 | <0.0001 |
| mPCWP, mm Hg | 15±7 | 31±8 | <0.0001 |
| PAC, mL/mm Hg | 3.6±2.3 | 2.6±1.7 | <0.01 |
| Echocardiography | |||
| IVS, mm | 15.8±5.0 | ||
| PWT, mm | 13.8±3.6 | ||
| 3D LV mass, g/m2 | 129±33 | ||
| 2D LVEF Simpson Biplane, % | 54±13 | 57±14 | 0.10 |
| LVGLS, % | 12±4 | 13±6 | 0.12 |
| Strain apical segments, % | 17±5 | 21±8 | <0.01 |
| Strain basal segments, % | 7.5±5.3 | 7.7±6.4 | 0.74 |
| A‐B strain diff, % | 9.7±4.2 | 12.9±4.7 | <0.01 |
| MWE, mm Hg L/min per g | 1.9±1.0 | 4.4±3.6 | <0.001 |
| E/A (ratio) | 2.2±1.4 | 2.4±1.2 | 0.97 |
| E/e′ (ratio) | 22±13 | 22±14 | 0.76 |
| LA volume, mL/m2 | 42±19 | ||
| RA volume, mL/m2 | 34±22 | ||
| TAPSE, cm | 1.8±0.7 | ||
| RVS′, cm/s | 8.9±2.4 | ||
2D indicates two‐dimensional; 3D, three‐dimensional; A‐B, apical to basal; CI, cardiac index; HR, heart rate; IVS, interventricular septal thickness; LA, left atrium; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVGLS, left ventricular global longitudinal strain; MAP, mean arterial blood pressure; mPAP, mean pulmonary artery pressure; mPCWP, mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; mRAP, mean right atrial pressure; MWE, myocardial work efficiency; PAC, pulmonary arterial compliance; PWT, posterior wall thickness; RA, right atrium; RVS’, peak systolic velocity of tricuspid annulus; TAPSE, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion; VO2, external oxygen consumption.
11C‐Acetate Positron Emission Tomography
| Controls (n=10) | All CA Patients (n=25) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| MEE, % | 24±5 | 13±5 | <0.0001 |
| EW, mm Hg×mL/min×103 | 446±103 | 346±142 | 0.05 |
| Total MVO2, mL/min | 13±3 | 18±6 | <0.01 |
| MVO2, mL/min per g | 0.10±0.02 | 0.09±0.02 | 0.22 |
| MBF, mL/min per g | 0.67±0.11 | 0.59±0.18 | 0.11 |
| Total work, J | 59±14 | 46±19 | 0.05 |
| HR, beats/min | 62±8 | 73±12 | <0.01 |
| MAP, mm Hg | 94±7 | 78±11 | <0.001 |
| LV mass index, g/m2 | 63±12 | 103±29 | <0.001 |
| CI, L/min per m2 | 2.4±0.6 | 2.2±0.6 | 0.46 |
| SVI, mL/m2 | 39±7 | 31±9 | <0.05 |
Data are presented as mean±SD or median and interquartile range. CI indicates cardiac index; EW, external stroke work; HR, heart rate; LV, left ventricular; MAP, mean arterial blood pressure; MBF, myocardial blood flow; MEE, myocardial external efficiency; MVO2, myocardial oxygen consumption; SVI, stroke volume index.
Univariate and LV Mass Adjusted Correlations Between PET‐Derived Myocardial External Efficiency and Myocardial Function in CA Patients
| Unadjusted | LV Mass Adjusted | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Echocardiography | ||||
| E/e′ | 0.14 | 0.07 | ··· | ··· |
| MWErest | 0.51 | <0.0001 | 0.57 | <0.0001 |
| MWEpeak | 0.48 | <0.0001 | 0.50 | <0.01 |
| LVGLSrest | 0.61 | <0.0001 | 0.61 | <0.0001 |
| LVGLSpeak | 0.60 | <0.0001 | 0.60 | <0.0001 |
| ΔA‐B strain difference | 0.27 | <0.01 | 0.40 | <0.05 |
| 3D LV mass | 0.39 | <0.01 | ··· | ··· |
| Invasive hemodynamics | ||||
| ΔCO/ΔVO2 | 0.21 | <0.05 | 0.35 | <0.05 |
| CIrest | 0.36 | <0.01 | 0.46 | <0.01 |
| CIpeak | 0.52 | <0.0001 | 0.55 | <0.01 |
| SVres | 0.37 | <0.01 | 0.53 | <0.01 |
| SVpeak | 0.44 | <0.01 | 0.63 | <0.0001 |
| VO2peak | 0.31 | <0.01 | 0.42 | <0.01 |
| PCWPrest | 0.11 | 0.13 | ··· | ··· |
| PCWPpeak | 0.04 | 0.40 | ··· | ··· |
| PACrest | 0.43 | <0.01 | 0.46 | <0.01 |
| PACpeak | 0.43 | <0.01 | 0.45 | <0.01 |
| RAPrest | 0.11 | 0.14 | ··· | ··· |
| RAPpeak | 0.13 | 0.11 | ··· | ··· |
| PET‐derived parameters | ||||
| MBF | 0.44 | <0.0001 | 0.46 | <0.01 |
| Total work | 0.44 | <0.0001 | 0.76 | <0.0001 |
| Total MVO2 | 0.14 | 0.07 | ··· | ··· |
3D indicates three‐dimensional; A‐B, apical to basal; CA, cardiac amyloidosis; CI, cardiac index; CO, cardiac output; LV, left ventricular; LVGLS, left ventricular global longitudinal strain; MBF, myocardial blood flow; MVO2, myocardial oxygen consumption; MWE, myocardial work efficiency; PAC, pulmonary arterial compliance; PCWP, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; PET, positron emission tomography; RAP, right atrial pressure; SV, stroke volume; VO2, external oxygen consumption.
Figure 1Box plots showing myocardial external efficiency (MEE) and myocardial oxygen consumption (MVO2) in controls and CA patients stratified into New York Heart Association (NYHA) groups.
Figure 2Box plots showing myocardial external efficiency (MEE) and myocardial oxygen consumption (MVO2) in controls and CA patients stratified into tertiles of resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS), myocardial work efficiency (MWE), cardiac index (CI), pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP), and pulmonary arterial compliance (PAC).
Figure 3Scatter plots with regression lines showing the relationship between myocardial external efficiency (MEE) and left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS), myocardial work efficiency (MWE), and E/e′ ratio in cardiac amyloidosis patients at rest and at peak exercise.
Figure 4Scatter plots with regression lines showing the relation between myocardial external efficiency (MEE) and cardiac index (CI), pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, and pulmonary arterial compliance (PAC) in cardiac amyloidosis patients at rest and at peak exercise.