| Literature DB >> 31730467 |
Mohammed A Moharram1, Regis R Lamberts2, Gillian Whalley1, Michael J A Williams1, Sean Coffey3.
Abstract
Myocardial pathology results in significant morbidity and mortality, whether due to primary cardiomyopathic processes or secondary to other conditions such as ischemic heart disease. Cardiac imaging techniques characterise the underlying tissue directly, by assessing a signal from the tissue itself, or indirectly, by inferring tissue characteristics from global or regional function. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is currently the most investigated imaging modality for tissue characterisation, but, due to its accessibility, advanced echocardiography represents an attractive alternative. Speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) is a reproducible technique used to assess myocardial deformation at both segmental and global levels. Since distinct myocardial pathologies affect deformation differently, information about the underlying tissue can be inferred by STE. In this review, the current available studies correlating STE deformation parameters with underlying tissue characteristics in humans are examined, with separate emphasis on global and segmental analysis. The current knowledge is placed in the context of integrated backscatter and the future of echocardiographic based tissue characterisation is discussed. The use of these imaging techniques to more precisely phenotype myocardial pathology more precisely will allow the design of translational cardiac research studies and, potentially, tailored management strategies.Entities:
Keywords: Echocardiography; Fibrosis; Myocardial histology; Speckle tracking; Strain
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31730467 PMCID: PMC6858720 DOI: 10.1186/s12947-019-0176-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound ISSN: 1476-7120 Impact factor: 2.062
Fig. 1Overview of imaging techniques for tissue characterisation. Accurate characterisation of important myocardial features, such as fibrosis or myocyte hypertrophy, would allow non-invasive diagnosis of myocardial pathology, potentially allowing the development of personalized therapies. (Image contains material licensed under CC-BY 3.0 from https://smart.servier.com/). Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; ECV, extracellular volume
Fig. 2Segmental Speckle Tracking longitudinal strain analysis. Segmental analysis of longitudinal strain in a normal heart (top row) compared to a patient with advanced hypertensive heart disease with reduced longitudinal strain (lower row). The longitudinal strain curves show deformation of individual segments which is reflected in the 16-segment Bull’s eye. In this case, segmental strain is relatively globally impaired due to the homogeneous myocardial distribution of the condition. Abbreviations: Apical 4C, apical four chamber view; Endo, endocardial, LS, longitudinal strain
Summary of studies correlating global deformation parameters with tissue characteristics
| Study | Patients and Pathology | Assessed global measures | Assessed Segmental measures | Tissue correlates | Correlations between global measures and tissue correlates | Correlations between segmental measures and tissue correlates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Almaas et al. 2013 (18). | 63 patients. 24 patients had septal myectomy samples analysed. HCM with/without ventricular arrhythmia. | GLS (n = 63); HCM without ventricular arrhythmias (mean(SD)) -14.7 (3.4), with ventricular arrhythmias −12.2 (3.7). | SSL ( | Fibrosis (perivascular, interstitial, subendocardial, replacement). | – | SSL ( |
| Almaas et al. 2014 (19). | HCM ( | (Total fibrosis> = 15%) GLS (OR 1.27, NS), GCS (OR 1.08, NS). | (Total fibrosis> = 15%) Septal LS (OR 1.38, (Multivariate OR 1.79, Septal CS (OR 1.06, NS). | Fibrosis (Total, interstitial, replacement). | – | SSL with fibrosis: total (r = 0.50, (r = 0.40 NS). |
| Kobayashi et al. 2013 (13). | HCM ( | 3 subgroups: HCM without hypertension, HCM with hypertension, and hypertensive heart disease without HCM. GLSR (mean(SD)) (−1.05 (0.3), − 1.01 (0.3), and − 1.14 (0.3), NS respectively) and SRe (1.03 (0.4), 0.96 (0.4), and 1.09 (0.3), NS, respectively). | 3 subgroups: HCM without hypertension, HCM with hypertension, and hypertensive heart disease without HCM. Basal SSRs (mean(SD)) (− 0.87 (0.5), − 0.95 (0.5), and − 0.98 (0.4), NS, respectively) and SSRe (0.76 (0.5), 0.86 (0.5), and 0.82 (0.5), NS, respectively). | Myocyte hypertrophy, myocyte disarray, SICAD, interstitial fibrosis. | – | SSRe, myocyte disarray −0.19, SSRs, myocyte hypertrophy 0.21, |
| Witjas-Paalberends, et al. 2014 (11). | HCM ( | GLS (mean(SD)) was reduced in both HCMMUT (− 16.0 (3.2)%) and HCMSMN (− 15.1 (3.1)%) compared with controls (− 21.0 ( 3.2)%, | SSL (mean(SD)) (%) HCMMUT (−7.0 (4.3) | Cardiomyocyte maximal developed tension. | – | Basal SSL: maximal tension (Spearman’s ρ 0.46, |
| Park et al. 2019 (23). | Severe AS ( | GLS (mean(SD)) (fibrosis, mild − 16.30 (2.97), moderate − 14.76 (3.95), severe −12.65 (3.07), | – | Fibrosis. | GLS, r = 0.421, Multivariate regression (R2 0.35, | – |
| Ávila-Vanzzini et al. 2016 (21). | Severe AS ( | Patients with more than 50% of PIELV and PIEF had (GLS (mean(SD)): −11.7 (3.3)% vs. -17.1 (1.7)%, Patients with more than 50% fibrosis had significantly lower GLS. | – | Myocardial interstitial fibrosis, Fatty infiltration. | GLS: Fibrosis (R2 0.661, | – |
| Fabiani et al. 2016 (22). | Severe AS ( | GLS % (n = 36) (mean(SD)) −14.0 (3.88). | SSRs (1/s) (mean(SD)) −0.58 (0.17), SSRe (1/s) 0.62 (0.32), SSL (%) − 9.63 (2.97). | Fibrosis, interstitial miRNA-21, plasmatic miRNA-21. | GLS, fibrosis: R2 = 0.30 and Interstitial miRNA-21, GLS: R2 = 0.34 and | SSL, Fibrosis: R2 = 0.36 and Interstitial miRNA-21, SSL: R2 = 0.32 and Plasmatic miRNA-21, SSL: R2 = 0.35; |
| Cameli et al. 2016 (20). | DCM, ICM ( | Patients with extensive fibrosis (> 50%) versus fibrosis(≤50%); GLS, GCS and torsion (mean(SD)) (− 5.4 (2.2) vs − 15.2 (9.1)%, | – | Myocardial fibrosis. | GLS (r = 0.75, | – |
| Escher et al. 2013 (24). | Myocarditis ( | In the acute phase all patients showed a reduction in GLSR (mean(SD)) (0.53 (0.29) 1/s) and GLS (− 8.36 (3.47)%) At follow-up GLS and GLSR were significantly lower in patients with inflammation, in contrast to the patients without inflammation (− 9.4 (1.4) versus − 16.8 (2.0)%, | – | Lymphocytic infiltrates, monocytes/macrophages (Mac-1). | GLS; lymphocytic infiltrates (for CD3 | |
| Kasner et al. 2013 (25). | Acute myocarditis ( | GLS (mean(SD)) (No myocarditis vs acute myocarditis − 17.86 (3.86) vs − 10.24 (4.12), GLSR (No myocarditis vs acute myocarditis 1.24 (0.26) vs 0.79 (0.27), | – | – | – | – |
| Mehta et al. 2019 [28]. | Cardiac Amyloidosis ( | GLS (mean (SD)) in patients with low-to-moderate amyloid burden versus patients with high amyloid burden − 10.7 (4.9) vs − 6.4 (3.7), | – | – | – | – |
HCM Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, GLS global longitudinal strain, SSL septal longitudinal strain, GCS global circumferential strain, NS not significant, AS aortic stenosis, PIELV percentage of infiltrating intra-endocardial lipid vacuoles, PIEF percentage of intra-endomyocardial fibrosis, GLSR global longitudinal systolic strain rate, SRe early systolic strain rate, SSRs septal systolic strain rate, SSRe septal early diastolic strain rate, SICAD small intramural coronary arteriole dysplasia, HCM sarcomere mutation-positive HCM, HCM sarcomere mutation-negative HCM, Mac-1 Macrophage 1 antigen, LFA-1 Lymphocyte function-associated antigen 1, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, FA-CM Friedreich ataxia cardiomyopathy
Summary of findings in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy and aortic stenosis
| Pathological Condition | Segmental STE Parameter | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| SRS | SRE | ||
| Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy | |||
| Myocyte hypertrophy | ↓a | ↓ | |
| Myocyte disarray | ↓ | ↓ | |
| Small intramural coronary arteriole dysplasia | ↓ | ↓ | |
| Interstitial fibrosis | ↓ | ↓ | |
| Dilated Cardiomyopathy | |||
| Myocyte diameter | ↓ | ↓↓ | |
| Interstitial fibrosis | NS | NS | |
| Gene expression | Transforming growth factor ß-1 | NS | NS |
| Collagen type I, Collagen type III | NS | ↓ | |
| Titin isoform N2B | NA | ↓ | |
| Titin isoforms N2BA | NA | ↓ b | |
| SERCA2a | ↓ | ↓ | |
| Phospholamban | NS | NS | |
| Phosphorylated Smad2/3 | NS | ↓ | |
| Protein expression | SERCA2a | ↓ | ↓ |
| Phosphorylated PLB | ↓ | ↓ | |
| Phosphorylated Smad2/3 | NS | NS | |
| Aortic Stenosis | |||
| Interstitial fibrosis | ↓ | ↓ | |
| Tissue miRNA-21 levels | NS | NS | |
a) Negative correlation between the absolute value of the deformation and the variable; the higher the value of the variable, the lower the deformation.
b) Positive correlation between the absolute value of the deformation and the variable; the higher the value of the variable, the higher the deformation.
Abbreviations: NA, not assessed or data not provided; NS, not statistically significant; SRS, systolic strain rate; SRE, early diastolic strain rate; STE, speckle tracking echocardiography; SERCA2a, Sarcoplasmic Reticulum Ca2+-ATPase
Fig. 3Pathological and imaging findings in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. The top row shows examples of pathological findings in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy - small intramural coronary arteriole dysplasia, with narrowed lumen (a and b, reproduced with permission from [54]), and interstitial fibrosis with widespread myocyte disarray (c, reproduced with permission from [55]). The bottom row shows imaging findings in a single patient. Speckle tracking echocardiography shows segmental impairment in longitudinal systolic strain, particularly in the base to mid inferior septum (d, arrow). Global longitudinal strain was normal, at − 19%. Cardiac MRI shows septal hypertrophy (e) with late gadolinium enhancement (f, arrow), corresponding to the area of impaired strain. Abbreviations: LA, left atrium; LV, left ventricle; RA, right atrium; RV, right ventricle