| Literature DB >> 35811573 |
Daniela Miranda-Silva1, Vasco Sequeira1,2, André P Lourenço1, Inês Falcão-Pires1.
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) triggered by cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular diseases is a leading cause of death worldwide and translational research is urgently needed to better understand the mechanisms of the failing heart. For this purpose, rodent models of heart disease combined with in vivo cardiac functional assessment have provided valuable insights into the physiological significance of a given genetic or pharmacological modification. In small animals, cardiac function and structure can be evaluated by methods such as echocardiography, telemetry or hemodynamics using conductance catheters. Indeed, hemodynamic analysis of pressure-volume loops (PV-loops) has become the gold standard methodology to study in vivo cardiac function in detail. This method provides simultaneous measurement of both pressure and volume signals from rodents intact beating hearts. On the one hand, PV-loop analysis has deeply expanded the knowledge on molecular cardiac physiology by allowing establishing important functional correlations. On the other hand, these measurements allow dissecting the cardiovascular functional impact of certain therapeutic interventions or specific signaling pathways using transgenic models of disease. However, a detailed assessment of cardiac function and structure in vivo still warrants proper standardization and optimization to boost the progress of HF research. With increasing concerns over data accuracy and reproducibility, guidelines and best practices for cardiac physiology measurements in experimental settings are needed. This article aims to review the best practices for carrying out cardiac hemodynamic assessment using PV-loops in vivo in rodents intact beating hearts, also providing an overview of its advantages, disadvantages and applications in cardiovascular research.Entities:
Keywords: P-V loop; conductance catheter; heart failure; hemodynamics; in vivo cardiac function
Year: 2022 PMID: 35811573 PMCID: PMC9260141 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2021.751326
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.755
FIGURE 1Main steps and recommendations (in red) for PV-loops experimentation.
FIGURE 2Pressure-volume loops in (A) physiologic conditions (a, ventricular filling; b, isovolumetric contraction; c, ejection; d, isovolumic relaxation). (B) PV loops with different preloads are obtained by occluding the vena cava. This manoeuvre allows obtaining end-diastolic pressure-volume relationship (ESPVR, slope of the linear regression) and end-diastolic pressure-volume relationship (EDPVR, slope of the exponential curve), load-independent indexes of contractility and stiffness, respectively. PV-loops in a condition of (C) systolic dysfunction, and HFrEF, in which ESPVR, SV and EF decrease and (D) diastolic dysfunction and HFpEF, in which hypertrophy and increased stiffness are observed. Schematic PV-loops drawing of increased (red) or decreased (blue) preload (E) and afterload (F).
Main advantages and disadvantages of pressure-volume loop analysis to assess cardiac function.
| Advantages of PV-loops | Disadvantages of PV-loops |
| Abundant and continuous data acquisition | Long-learning curve – surgical skills are needed |
| Load-independent measures of cardiac function | Invasive acute procedure |
| Pressure-derived parameters | Impossibility to perform longitudinal studies |
| High temporal resolution | Need to optimize fluid replacement |
| Reproductivity | Always requires anesthesia |
| Low maintenance cost | Open-chest approach requires mechanical ventilation |
| Free from radiation | Open-chest approach deviates from physiology |
PV loop derived parameters.
| Parameter | S/D | Description | |
| ESV | End-systolic volume | S | Ventricular volume at the end of systole |
| EDV | End-diastolic volume | D | Ventricular volume at the end of diastole |
| Pmax | Maximal pressure | S | Maximal pressure during systole |
| Pmin | Minimal pressure | D | Minimal pressure during diastole |
| ESP | End-systolic pressure | S | Pressure reached at the end of the systole |
| EDP | End-diastolic pressure | D | Pressure reached at the end of diastole |
| PE | Potential energy | Is defined by the area between the ESPVR and EDPVR curves to the left of the PV loop. PE = ESP (ESV−V0)/2−EDP (EDV−V0)/4, where V0 is the theoretical volume when no pressure is generated | |
| PRSW | Preload recruited stroke work | Is calculated as the linear regression of stroke work with the end-diastolic volume. The slope of the PRSW relationship is a highly linear index of myocardial contractility that is load insensitive | |
| PVA | Pressure volume area | Represents the total mechanical energy (TME) generated by ventricular contraction. This is equal to the sum of the stroke work (SW), encompassed within the PV loop, and the elastic potential energy (PE) | |
| dP/dtmax | Maximal velocity of pressure rise | S | Reported as maximal rate of pressure change in the ventricle. dP/dtmax are dependent on load and heart rate. LV dP/dtmax occurs before aortic valve closure |
| dP/dtmin | Maximal velocity of pressure decrease | D | Reported as minimal rate of pressure change in the ventricle. dP/dtmin are dependent on load and heart rate. LV dP/dtmin is a marker of the start of left ventricular isovolumic relaxation |
| SV | Stroke volume | S | The volume ejected in each cardiac cycle |
| SW | Stroke work | S | The area of the PV-loop ( |
| EF | Ejection fraction | S | Indicates the percentage change in LV volumes |
| HR | Heart rate | Number of cardiac cycles (beats) per minute | |
| CO | Cardiac output | S | The amount of blood pumped by the ventricle by unit time. Is calculated as stroke volume multiplied by heart rate |
| CI | Cardiac index | S | CI = CO/body-surface-area (calculated as BW^2/3) |
| Ea | Arterial elastance | A measure of arterial load and its impact on the ventricle. Calculated as the simple ratio of ventricular end-systolic pressure to stroke volume | |
| Tau | Exponential decay of the ventricular pressure during isovolumic relaxation | D | The time constant for ventricular pressure fall during active relaxation. Is the preferred method for assessing relaxation because it can be measured more accurately than dP/dtmin, relaxation half time, and isovolumic relaxation time |
| CT | Contraction time | S | Duration of isovolumic contraction |
| RT | Relaxation time | D | Duration of isovolumic relaxation |
| ESPVR | End-systolic pressure-volume relationship | S | Represents the contractility of the ventricle. Describes the maximal pressure that can be developed by the ventricle at any given cardiac chamber volume. The slope and x-intercept of the ESPVR is generated experimentally by occluding the inferior vena cava ( |
| EDPVR | End-diastolic pressure-volume relationship | D | Described the passive curve during ventricular filling and thus represent the passive proprieties of the myocardium during passive diastole. The EDPVR slope is reciprocal to ventricular compliance or stiffness. This curve is experimentally obtained after occlusion of inferior vena cava |
S, systole; D, diastole.