| Literature DB >> 31924159 |
Hua-Yan Xu1,2,3, Zhi-Gang Yang3, Yi Zhang3, Wan-Lin Peng3, Chun-Chao Xia3, Zhen-Lin Li3, Yong He4, Rong Xu3, Li Rao4, Ying Peng4, Yu-Ming Li3, Hong-Ling Gao4, Ying-Kun Guo5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are at high cardiovascular risk, and myocardial fibrosis (MF) accounts for most of their cardiac events. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prognostic value and risk stratification of MF as measured by extracellular volume (ECV) on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) for heart failure (HF) in patients with hemodialysis-dependent ESRD.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac magnetic resonance; ECV; End stage renal disease; Heart failure; Myocardial fibrosis; T1 mapping
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31924159 PMCID: PMC6954545 DOI: 10.1186/s12872-019-01313-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.298
Baseline of normal healthy and ERSD patients
| Normal ( | ERSD( | |
|---|---|---|
| Age(Y) | 51.21 ± 6.06 | 55.10 ± 15.83 |
| Male (n, %) | 9 (36.00%) | 25 (37.87%) |
| Weight (kg) | 57.83 ± 8.45 | 58.01 ± 11.29 |
| Height (cm) | 160.70 ± 6.39 | 158.93 ± 8.47 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24.02 ± 2.53 | 22.75 ± 3.61 |
| BSA(m2) | 1.52 ± 0.13 | 1.56 ± 0.178 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 117.25 ± 13.48 | 141.45 ± 23.45 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 70.69 ± 19.17 | 86.84 ± 16.05 |
| HR (beats/min) | 72.35 ± 21.66 | 81.81 ± 14.38 |
| During of CKD | – | 3 month-20 year |
| During of dialysis | – | 3 month-11 year |
| Occurrence of HF (n, %) | – | 25 (37.87%) |
| Causes of ESRD | ||
| Polycystic kidney disease (n, %) | – | 16 (24.24%) |
| Primary glomerular nephropathy (n, %) | – | 35 (53.03%) |
| Vasculitis (n, %) | – | 3 (4.54%) |
| Genitourinary tuberculosis (n, %) | – | 2 (3.03%) |
| Ureteral tumor (n, %) | – | 1 (1.51%) |
| Primary hypertension | – | 9 (13.64%) |
| The biochemical measurements | ||
| eGFR (ml/min/1.732 m2) (normal range 80-120 ml/min/1.72 m2) | – | 6.35 ± 2.77 |
| Urea (mmol/l) (normal range 3.30–8.22)* | – | 909.00 (651.00–1052.25) |
| Uric acid (umol/l) (normal range 240.0–490.0) | – | 432.63 ± 147.28 |
| Creatinine (umol/l) ( | – | 824.07 ± 290.44 |
| Hct (L/L) ( | – | 0.34 ± 0.06 |
| PTH (pmol/l) | – | 33.55 (21.62, 73.245) |
| Hb(g/l) (male 120–160; female110–150) | – | 102.15 ± 26.72 |
| Blood pressure Medications | ||
| Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker diuretic | – | 25 (37.88%) |
| Calcium channel blocker | – | 38 (57.57%) |
| ɑ blocker | – | 15 (46.88%) |
| β blocker | – | 10 (15.16%) |
Values are mean ± SD, median(quartile) or n (%). * means the data is not conformed with normal distribution and presented as median (quartile). BMI Body mass index, BSA body surface area, HR heart rate, ESRD End-stage renal disease, CKD chronic kidney disease, eGFR estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate, Hb hemoglobin, Hct hematocrit, PTH parathyroid hormone
CMR finding in ESRD patients suffered and free of HF
| Normal healthy ( | ESRD free of HF ( | ESRD Suffered HF ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| LV function | |||
| EF (%) | 64.99 ± 4.43 | 58.10 ± 6.99a | 45.77 ± 17.04a,b |
| EDV (ml) | 116.45 ± 31.32 | 122.22 ± 32.25 | 155.08 ± 63.04a |
| ESV (ml) | 42.07 ± 9.14 | 52.05 ± 16.86 | 92.58 ± 70.56a,b |
| SV (ml) | 78.65 ± 16.60 | 69.84 ± 19.17 | 61.73 ± 19.52a,b |
| Mass(g) | 51.79 ± 17.31 | 84.63 ± 31.75 | 95.03 ± 29.95a,b |
| Myocardial strain | |||
| GRS (%) | 43.13 ± 10.66 | 43.40 ± 14.74 | 31.89 ± 16.20a,b |
| GCS (%)a | −18.61 (−20.25, −16.90) | −18.91 (− 20.92, − 16.70) | −17.10 (− 19.04, − 12.31)a,b |
| GLS (%) | −16.68 ± 2.90 | −15.99 ± 3.36 | −12.96 ± 4.98a,b |
| Presence of LGE | |||
| Non-presence (n, %) | N/A | 2 (5.00%) | 0 |
| Patchy (n, %) | N/A | 17 (42.50%) | 7 (26.92%) |
| Diffused (n, %) | N/A | 21 (52.50%) | 19 (73.08%) |
| Total enhanced volume>5SD(ml) | N/A | 14.62 ± 12.79 | 23.13 ± 13.10b |
| LGE Extent>5SD(%) | N/A | 13.92 ± 12.18 | 22.04 ± 12.47b |
| T1maps | |||
| Native T1 values (ms) | 1276.35 ± 56.56 | 1319.39 ± 55.44a | 1360.10 ± 50.14a,b |
| Post-contrast T1 values (ms) | 502.91 ± 30.76 | 497..74 ± 74.24 | 510.24 ± 71.21 |
| λ (%) | 49.79 ± 3.79 | 48.80 ± 5.81a | 51.06 ± 6.24a,b |
| ECV (%) | 26.97 ± 1.87 | 31.85 ± 3.01a | 35.42 ± 4.42a,b |
Values are mean ± SD or n (%) or median (quartile) as appropriate. aP < 0.05 vs. normal; bP < 0.05 vs. ESRD free from HF. CMR cardiac magnetic resonance, HF heart failure, LV left ventricular, EF ejection fraction, EDV end-diastolic volume, ESV end-systolic volume, SV stroke volume, GRS global radial strain, GCS global circumferential strain, GLS global longitudinal strain, LGE late gadolinium enhancement, ECV extra cellular volume. All the other abbreviations are the same as the Table 1
CMR finding in ESRD with diffused and patchy LGE
| ESRD without diffused LGE ( | ESRD with diffused LGE ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Native T1 values (ms) | 1309.23 ± 59.08 | 1352.45 ± 48.60 | 0.00 |
| Post T1 values (ms) | 494.85 ± 66.67 | 507.38 ± 76.75 | 0.499 |
| ECV (%) | 32.07 ± 3.74 | 34.03 ± 3.74 | 0.041 |
| λ (%) | 48.36 ± 5.97 | 50.56 ± 6.01 | 0.151 |
| Total enhanced volume>5SD(ml) | 5.99 ± 4.77 | 26.18 ± 11.16 | <0.001 |
| LGE Extent>5SD(%) | 10.17 ± 8.22 | 37.62 ± 14.91 | <0.001 |
| GRS (%) | 44.04 ± 12.36 | 35.49 ± 17.65 | 0.036 |
| GCS (%) | −18.76(−20.65, −16.92) | −17.15(−19.30, −14.34) | 0.004 |
| GLS (%) | −16.52 ± 2.35 | −13.67 ± 4.91 | 0.003 |
| HF (n, %) | 4 (15.38%) | 22 (55%) | <0.001 |
Values are mean ± SD or n (%) or median (quartile) as appropriate. All the abbreviations are the same as the Tables 1 and 2
Fig. 1Representative examples of T1 mapping with corresponding LGE images. The color bars of all T1 maps are exhibited on the lower left quarter of the top row of figures. Changes in color from the bottom to the top of the color bar correspond to value increases. Top row: An ESRD patient suffering from HF had a longer native T1 value (1412.72 ms) (a) and a shorter post-contrast T1 value (411.92 ms) (b) with increasing ECV (33.61%) and a redder ECV map (c) and diffuse LGE (d). Middle row: An ESRD patient without HF showing a lower native T1 value, post T1 value (f) and ECV exhibited a patchy LGE (h) and a corresponding patchy native T1 (e) and ECV (g) enlargement area (patchy deep red area in the ECV map) in T1 mapping (white arrow). Bottom row: Native T1, post-contrast T1 and ECV mapping were homogeneous in a normal control subject (1189 ms, 518.33 ms, 24.33%) (i-l) without LGE enhancement. LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; ESRD, end-stage renal disease; HF, heart failure; ECV, extracellular volume
Fig. 2Correlations between ECV and LV strain parameters. ECV was negatively associated with GRS (r = − 0.501, p = 0.009) (a), GCS (r = 0.553, p = 0.005) (b) and GLS (r = 0.507, p = 0.008) (c) in ESRD patients suffering from HF. LV, left ventricle; GRS, global radial strain; GCS, global circumferential strain; GLS, global longitudinal strain. The other abbreviations are the same as in Fig. 1
Fig. 3Kaplan–Meier curves (a) and risk stratification curves (b) for the development of HF in high- and low-ECV groups of ESRD patients. Kaplan–Meier curves showed that the high-ECV group had a shorter median survival time than the low-ECV group (18 months vs. 20 months; log-rank p = 0.046). Risk stratification analysis by hazard function curve indicated that the ESRD patients with high ECV were more likely to have HF. M, months. The abbreviations are the same as in Fig. 1
Predictors for HF by univariate and logistic regression
| Univariate analysis | Cox proportional hazard regression | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | P | HR | 95%CI | p | |
| Age | 0.068 | 0.811 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Gender | −0.014 | 0.552 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| BMI | −0.006 | 0.759 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| BSA | −0.171 | 0.040a | 1.254 | 0.092–17.103 | 0.865 |
| Height | −0.298a | 0.002 | 0.967 | 0.910–1.027 | 0.277 |
| Weight | −0.147 | 0.074 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Systolic BP | −0.228 | 0.130 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Diastolic BP | −0.087 | 0.849 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| During of CKD | 0.067 | 0.083 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| During of dialysis | 0.223 | 0.069 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| GRS | −0.334a | 0.001 | 0.970 | 0.898–1.049 | 0.447 |
| GCS | 0.342a | 0.001 | 0.862 | 0.611–1.218 | 0.401 |
| GLS | 0.330a | 0.002 | 1.089 | 0.734–1.614 | 0.672 |
| Native T1 | 0.340a | 0.003 | 0.997 | 0.988–1.006 | 0.548 |
| Post T1 | 0.116 | 0.252 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| ECV | 0.491a | < 0.0001 | 1.160 | 1.022–1.318 | 0.022b |
| λ | 0.229 | 0.085 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Total enhanced volume>5SD | 0.240a | 0.022 | 1.022 | 0.983–1.062 | 0.266 |
| Volume fraction >5SD | 0.225 | 0.059 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Myocardial T2 values | 0.139 | 0.436 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
HR Hazard ratio, CI confidence interval; All the other abbreviations are the same as the Tables 1 and 2. amean, p ≤ 0.05; bp = 0.046
Fig. 4Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) comparison curve of native T1, post T1 and ECV. ECV exhibited a higher diagnostic accuracy for detecting MF (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.936; 95% confidence interval: 0.864 to 0.976, criterion> 28.89%) than did native T1 or post T1 (all p < 0.05). The abbreviations are the same as in Fig. 1