INTRODUCTION: Distinguishing between hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and other causes ofleft ventricular hypertrophy can be difficult in children. We hypothesised that cardiac MRI T1 mapping could improve diagnosis of paediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and that measures of myocardial function would correlate with T1 times and extracellular volume fraction. METHODS: Thirty patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy completed MRI with tissue tagging, T1-mapping, and late gadolinium enhancement. Left ventricular circumferential strain was calculated from tagged images. T1, partition coefficient, and synthetic extracellular volume were measured at base, mid, apex, and thickest area of myocardial hypertrophy. MRI measures compared to cohort of 19 healthy children and young adults. Mann-Whitney U, Spearman's rho, and multivariable logistic regression were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients had increased left ventricular ejection fraction and indexed mass. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients had decreased global strain and increased native T1 (-14.3% interquartile range [-16.0, -12.1] versus -17.3% [-19.0, -15.7], p < 0.001 and 1015 ms [991, 1026] versus 990 ms [972, 1001], p = 0.019). Partition coefficient and synthetic extracellular volume were not increased in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Global native T1 correlated inversely with ejection fraction (ρ = -0.63, p = 0.002) and directly with global strain (ρ = 0.51, p = 0.019). A logistic regression model using ejection fraction and native T1 distinguished between hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and control with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.91. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of paediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, strain was decreased and native T1 was increased compared with controls. Native T1 correlated with both ejection fraction and strain, and a model using native T1 and ejection fraction differentiated patients with and without hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
INTRODUCTION: Distinguishing between hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and other causes ofleft ventricular hypertrophy can be difficult in children. We hypothesised that cardiac MRI T1 mapping could improve diagnosis of paediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and that measures of myocardial function would correlate with T1 times and extracellular volume fraction. METHODS: Thirty patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy completed MRI with tissue tagging, T1-mapping, and late gadolinium enhancement. Left ventricular circumferential strain was calculated from tagged images. T1, partition coefficient, and synthetic extracellular volume were measured at base, mid, apex, and thickest area of myocardial hypertrophy. MRI measures compared to cohort of 19 healthy children and young adults. Mann-Whitney U, Spearman's rho, and multivariable logistic regression were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients had increased left ventricular ejection fraction and indexed mass. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients had decreased global strain and increased native T1 (-14.3% interquartile range [-16.0, -12.1] versus -17.3% [-19.0, -15.7], p < 0.001 and 1015 ms [991, 1026] versus 990 ms [972, 1001], p = 0.019). Partition coefficient and synthetic extracellular volume were not increased in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Global native T1 correlated inversely with ejection fraction (ρ = -0.63, p = 0.002) and directly with global strain (ρ = 0.51, p = 0.019). A logistic regression model using ejection fraction and native T1 distinguished between hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and control with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.91. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of paediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, strain was decreased and native T1 was increased compared with controls. Native T1 correlated with both ejection fraction and strain, and a model using native T1 and ejection fraction differentiated patients with and without hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Scott A Simpson; Suzanne L Field; Meng Xu; Benjamin R Saville; David A Parra; Jonathan H Soslow Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2017-12-14 Impact factor: 1.655
Authors: Leah M Iles; Andris H Ellims; Huw Llewellyn; James L Hare; David M Kaye; Catriona A McLean; Andrew J Taylor Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: James C Moon; Daniel R Messroghli; Peter Kellman; Stefan K Piechnik; Matthew D Robson; Martin Ugander; Peter D Gatehouse; Andrew E Arai; Matthias G Friedrich; Stefan Neubauer; Jeanette Schulz-Menger; Erik B Schelbert Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-10-14 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Peter P Swoboda; Adam K McDiarmid; Bara Erhayiem; Graham R Law; Pankaj Garg; David A Broadbent; David P Ripley; Tarique A Musa; Laura E Dobson; James R Foley; Graham J Fent; Stephen P Page; John P Greenwood; Sven Plein Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2017-02-20 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Jeanette Schulz-Menger; David A Bluemke; Jens Bremerich; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Raymond J Kim; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Christopher M Kramer; Dudley J Pennell; Sven Plein; Eike Nagel Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Andre Rudolph; Daniel Messroghli; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Julius Traber; Johannes Schüler; Ralf Wassmuth; Jeanette Schulz-Menger Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 1.930
Authors: Pierpaolo Palumbo; Francesco Masedu; Camilla De Cataldo; Ester Cannizzaro; Federico Bruno; Silvia Pradella; Francesco Arrigoni; Marco Valenti; Alessandra Splendiani; Antonio Barile; Andrea Giovagnoni; Carlo Masciocchi; Ernesto Di Cesare Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2021-12-11 Impact factor: 3.469