| Literature DB >> 33754487 |
Bálint Károly Lakatos1, Mihály Ruppert1, Márton Tokodi1, Attila Oláh1, Szilveszter Braun1, Christian Karime1, Zsuzsanna Ladányi1, Alex Ali Sayour1, Bálint András Barta1, Béla Merkely1, Tamás Radovits1, Attila Kovács1.
Abstract
AIMS: While global longitudinal strain (GLS) is considered to be a sensitive marker of left ventricular (LV) function, it is significantly influenced by loading conditions. We hypothesized that global myocardial work index (GMWI), a novel marker of LV function, may show better correlation with load-independent markers of LV contractility in rat models of pressure-induced or volume overload-induced heart failure. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Echocardiography; Heart failure; Myocardial work; Pressure overload; Volume overload
Year: 2021 PMID: 33754487 PMCID: PMC8120402 DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.13314
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ESC Heart Fail ISSN: 2055-5822
Intra‐ and interobserver variability of the key LV deformation parameters
| Intraobserver variability | Interobserver variability | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICC (95% CI) | CV | ICC (95% CI) | CV | |
| GLS | 0.974 (0.913–0.993) | 4.168% | 0.944 (0.816–0.985) | 7.462% |
| GMWI | 0.962 (0.872–0.990) | 4.954% | 0.929 (0.771–0.980) | 7.883% |
ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; CV, coefficient of variation; CI, confidence interval; GLS, global longitudinal strain; GMWI, global myocardial work index
Basic haemodynamic data of the study groups
| PO‐induced HF | VO‐induced HF | PO vs. VO | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shamt ( | TAC ( |
| Shama ( | ACF ( |
|
| |
| HR, b.p.m. | 331 ± 29 | 301 ± 22 | 0.01 | 310 ± 22 | 309 ± 22 | 0.98 | 0.40 |
| LVESP, mmHg | 118.2 ± 14.0 | 233.1 ± 31.7 | <0.001 | 120.6 ± 14.3 | 106.9 ± 17.4 | 0.06 | <0.001 |
| LVEDP, mmHg | 8.7 ± 2.5 | 22.7 ± 7.6 | <0.001 | 10.5 ± 3.0 | 17.5 ± 5.3 | <0.001 | 0.07 |
| LVEDV, μL | 283.5 ± 47.4 | 314.7 ± 78.3 | 0.25 | 280.1 ± 35.4 | 475.2 ± 93.5 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LVESV, μL | 124.7 ± 26.9 | 218.4 ± 72.7 | <0.001 | 119.4 ± 36.0 | 262.5 ± 70.9 | <0.001 | 0.15 |
| SV, μL | 158.8 ± 27.3 | 96.4 ± 31.4 | <0.001 | 160.7 ± 33.0 | 212.7 ± 59.5 | 0.02 | <0.001 |
| EF, % | 56.4 ± 5.1 | 31.6 ± 10.1 | <0.001 | 57.7 ± 10.5 | 44.8 ± 9.6 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| CO, mL/min | 52 558 ± 10 032 | 28 824 ± 9214 | <0.001 | 49 982 ± 11 201 | 66 225 ± 19 884 | 0.03 | <0.001 |
| SW, mmHg*mL | 15 040 ± 3347 | 15 325 ± 6183 | 0.89 | 15 659 ± 3692 | 16 492 ± 5536 | 0.68 | 0.64 |
| EDPVR, mmHg/μL | 0.024 ± 0.003 | 0.094 ± 0.015 | <0.001 | 0.027 ± 0.003 | 0.030 ± 0.003 | 0.49 | <0.001 |
CO, cardiac output; EDPVR: end‐diastolic pressure‐volume relationship; HR, heart rate; LVEDP, left ventricular end‐diastolic pressure; LVEDV, left ventricular end‐diastolic volume; LVEF, ejection fraction; LVESP, left ventricular end‐systolic pressure; LVESV, left ventricular end‐systolic volume; SV, stroke volume; SW, stroke work.
Figure 1(A) Morphological features of the study groups measured by echocardiography. Upper panel: Representative 2D echocardiographic images of the two heart failure models and a Sham‐operated animal (red lines: myocardial wall thickness, white lines: end‐diastolic diameter). While the left ventricular (LV) end‐diastolic diameter was markedly enlarged in aortocaval fistula (ACF, n = 12) group, it was only mildly increased in transverse aortic constriction (TAC, n = 12) compared to their corresponding control (Shama and Shamt, n = 12/12). The relative wall thickness was decreased in ACF, while it was increased in TAC. LV fractional shortening was significantly lower in both HF groups. On the other hand, LV ejection fraction was maintained in ACF, while it was significantly lower in TAC compared to their corresponding Sham. [Statistics: Student's unpaired t‐test]. (b) Markers of left ventricular (LV) fibrosis and wall stress. Upper panel: Representative histological samples of the two heart failure models and a Sham‐operated animal. The area of interstitial and perivascular fibrosis was unaltered in the aortocaval fistula (ACF, n = 6) model compared to its Sham operated control (Shama, n = 6), while it was significantly increased in transverse aortic constriction (TAC, n = 6) model compared with the corresponding Sham group (Shamt, n = 6). Nevertheless, both atrial (ANP) and brain‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels were significantly increased in both HF models. [Statistics: Student's unpaired t‐test; Mann–Whitney U‐test].
Basic echocardiographic data of the study groups
| PO‐induced HF | VO‐induced HF | PO vs. VO | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shamt ( | TAC ( |
| Shama ( | ACF ( |
|
| |
| LVEDD, mm | 7.85 ± 0.76 | 8.98 ± 0.54 | <0.01 | 8.37 ± 0.54 | 13.25 ± 1.06 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LVESD, mm | 4.16 ± 0.76 | 6.21 ± 0.82 | <0.001 | 4.82 ± 0.71 | 8.69 ± 0.66 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| RWT, % | 0.497 ± 0.05 | 0.657 ± 0.11 | <0.001 | 0.491 ± 0.07 | 0.341 ± 0.05 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LVM, g | 1.19 ± 0.24 | 2.69 ± 0.59 | <0.001 | 1.39 ± 0.18 | 3.42 ± 0.69 | <0.001 | 0.03 |
| LVMi, g/m2 | 1.09 ± 0.19 | 2.29 ± 0.47 | <0.001 | 1.26 ± 0.14 | 2.87 ± 0.55 | <0.001 | 0.03 |
| FS, % | 47.4 ± 5.4 | 30.7 ± 8.8 | <0.001 | 42.5 ± 6.4 | 34.2 ± 5.0 | <0.01 | 0.28 |
| EF, % | 66.7 ± 6.2 | 49.6 ± 8.9 | <0.001 | 64.8 ± 9.2 | 59.0 ± 3.6 | 0.06 | <0.01 |
| LVEDV, μL | 383.8 ± 91.1 | 600.7 ± 74.2 | <0.001 | 546.8 ± 46.2 | 1815.3 ± 251.3 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LVESV, μL | 128.0 ± 39.8 | 304.4 ± 74.1 | <0.001 | 191.7 ± 50.1 | 743.1 ± 111.9 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| SV, μL | 255.8 ± 62.9 | 296.3 ± 54.0 | 0.16 | 355.0 ± 63.3 | 1072.2 ± 172.6 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| CO, mL/min | 102 295 ± 22 236 | 89 708 ± 17 382 | 0.20 | 127 973 ± 19 838 | 337 487 ± 66 083 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
CO, cardiac output; EF, ejection fraction; FS, fractional shotening; LVEDD, left‐ventricular end‐diastolic diameter; LVEDV, left ventricular end‐diastolic volume; LVESD, left ventricular end‐systolic diameter; LVESV, left ventricular end‐systolic volume; LVM, left ventrricular mass; LVMi, left ventricular mass index; RWT, relative wall thickness; SV, stroke volume.
Figure 2Left ventricular (LV) functional parameters. (A) Representative pressure‐volume loops of the study groups. Preload recruitable stroke work, a load‐independent marker of contractility, showed distinct changes in haemodynamic overload states: aortocaval fistula (ACF, n = 12) demonstrated significantly deteriorated values, while the transverse aortic constriction (TAC, n = 12) group had maintained LV contractility. (b) In contrast with these findings, global longitudinal strain was only mildly decreased in the ACF group while it was markedly lower in TAC compared with their corresponding sham (Shama and Shamt, n = 12/12). (c) Representative pressure‐strain loops of the study groups. The changes of global myocardial work index (GMWI) showed a pattern resembling to PRSW: in ACF, GMWI was significantly lower, while it was preserved in TAC compared with their control. [Statistics: Student's unpaired t‐test].
Figure 3Correlation of left ventricular (LV) contractility and LV deformation parameters. Global longitudinal strain (GLS) did not correlate with preload recruitable stroke work (PRSW). Conversely, global myocardial work index (GMWI) demonstrated strong correlation with PRSW, a gold standard load‐independent parameter of LV contractility in the pooled study population (n = 48). [Statistics: Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis].
Figure 4Correlation between global longitudinal strain (GLS) and markers of LV wall stress and fibrosis. GLS showed a significant correlation with atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP; n = 24) as well as area of myocardial interstitial fibrosis (n = 39) in the pooled study population. [Statistics: Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficient analysis].