| Literature DB >> 31658281 |
David C Steinl1, Lifen Xu1, Amanda Ochoa-Espinosa1, Mukesh Punjabi1, Beat A Kaufmann1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myocarditis can lead to myocyte loss and myocardial fibrosis resulting in dilated cardiomyopathy (DCMP). Currently employed methods for assessing the risk for development of DCMP are inaccurate or rely on invasive myocardial biopsies. We hypothesized that molecular imaging of tissue inflammation with contrast enhanced ultrasound during peak inflammation in myocarditis could predict development of fibrosis and impaired left ventricular function. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31658281 PMCID: PMC6816567 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224377
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Physiologic data and echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular dimensions.
| Day 21 | Day 63 | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21.1 (19.2–21.6) | 22.7 (21.9–23.6) | <0.0001 | |
| 421 (391–452) | 364 (345–389) | <0.0001 | |
| - | 133 (127–144) | - | |
| 0.91 (0.83–1.06) | 0.85 (0.77–0.96) | 0.05 | |
| 3.50 (3.20–3.73) | 3.90 (3.84–4.02) | <0.0001 | |
| 0.75 (0.71–0.90) | 0.68 (0.63–0.72) | <0.0001 | |
| 2.10 (1.78–2.42) | 2.87 (2.76–3.16) | <0.0001 | |
| 90 (82.98–99.9) | 86 (81.5–94.2) | ns | |
| 58.8 (51.9–65.2) | 75.6 (67.9–79.7) | <0.0001 | |
| 20 (15.3–24.2) | 39.7 (33.9–45.6) | <0.0001 |
bpm, beats per minute, LV AWd left ventricular anterior wall in diastole, LV IDd left ventricular inner diameter in diastole, LV PWd left ventricular posterior wall in diastole, LV IDs left ventricular inner diameter in systole, LV mass left ventricular mass, LV Vold left ventricular volume in diastole, LV Vols left ventricular volume in systole
Echocardiographic parameters of systolic and diastolic function.
| Day 21 | Day 63 | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 67 (59.2–73.9) | 47.2 (42–51.6) | <0.0001 | |
| 16 (14–18) | 14 (11–15) | <0.0001 | |
| 15 (11–19) | 11 (10–14) | <0.0001 | |
| 8.7 (7.4–10.2) | 6.9 (5.8–8.0) | <0.001 | |
| -18 (-22 –-16) | -13 (-15 –-10) | <0.0001 | |
| 33 (25–42) | 24 (19–27) | <0.0001 | |
| -5.6 (-6.8 –-5.1) | -4.4 (-4.7 –-3.7) | <0.001 | |
| -13 (-15 –-11) | -11 (-12 –-10) | <0.0001 | |
| -7.6 (-8.4 –-6.1) | -4.5 (-5.1 –-3.4) | <0.0001 | |
| 67 (59–74) | 65 (56–81) | ns | |
| 31 (18–36) | 15 (0.5–21) | <0.0001 | |
| 1.9 (1.6–2.1) | 4.0 (2.8–6.0) | <0.0001 |
Invasive hemodynamics–comparison to published normal values [11].
| Day 63 | Normal | |
|---|---|---|
| 6597 (5518–7245) | 7700–14480 | |
| 5987 (6968–5102) | 6900–10400 | |
| 12.4 (9.6–14.3) | 4.4–7.6 | |
| 12.5 (8.2–17.0) | 1–6 |
dp/dt max, peak first derivative of pressure increase in the left ventricle; dp/dt min, peak first derivative of pressure decrease in the left ventricle; Tau, left ventricular relaxation time constant; LVEDP, left ventricular enddiastolic pressure.
Fig 1Extent of fibrosis as assessed on PicroSirius Red stained histological sections.
(A) demonstrates an example of minimal fibrosis, (B) an example of extensive fibrosis both in the anterolateral and septal left ventricular wall. (C) graph illustrating the distribution of the extent of fibrosis among all animals included in the study.
Fig 2Correlation of ultrasound molecular imaging on day 21 with degree of fibrosis on day 63.
rs denotes Spearman r.
Correlation of functional parameters on day 21 with extent of fibrosis on day 63.
| Parameter vs. fibrosis | r | p | n |
|---|---|---|---|
| -0.27 | 0.053 | 53 | |
| -0.13 | 0.346 | 53 | |
| -0.27 | 0.051 | 53 | |
| -0.07 | 0.60 | 53 | |
| 0.17 | 0.24 | 53 | |
| 0.48 | 0.0003 | 53 | |
| 0.24 | 0.08 | 53 | |
| 0.22 | 0.11 | 54 | |
| -0.16 | 0.25 | 53 | |
| 0.29 | 0.04 | 52 | |
| -0.06 | 0.68 | 52 | |
| 0.12 | 0.40 | 53 |