| Literature DB >> 35983187 |
Fabrizio Ricci1,2, Giovanni Donato Aquaro3, Carlo De Innocentiis1, Serena Rossi4, Cesare Mantini1, Francesca Longo5, Mohammed Y Khanji6,7,8, Sabina Gallina1, Alessandro Pingitore9.
Abstract
Background: Strenuous exercise has been associated with functional and structural cardiac changes due to local and systemic inflammatory responses, reflecting oxidative, metabolic, hormonal, and thermal stress, even in healthy individuals. We aimed to assess changes in myocardial structure and function using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in master triathletes early after a full-distance Ironman Triathlon race. Materials and methods: Ten master triathletes (age 45 ± 8 years) underwent CMR within 3 h after a full-distance Ironman Triathlon race (3.8 km swimming, 180 km cycling, and 42.2 km running) completed with a mean time of 12 ± 1 h. All the triathletes had a 30-day follow-up CMR. Cine balanced steady-state free precession, T2-short tau inversion recovery (STIR), tagging, and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging sequences were performed on a 1.5-T MR scanner. Myocardial edema was defined as a region with increased T2 signal intensity (SI) of at least two SDs above the mean of the normal myocardium. The extent of myocardial edema was expressed as the percentage of left ventricular (LV) mass. Analysis of LV strain and torsion by tissue tagging included the assessment of radial, longitudinal, and circumferential peak systolic strain, rotation, and twist.Entities:
Keywords: CMR; Ironman; athlete’s heart; deformation imaging; master triathletes
Year: 2022 PMID: 35983187 PMCID: PMC9378862 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.908619
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Characteristics of the study population (n = 10).
| Age (years) | 45 ± 8 |
| Males, n (%) | 9 (90) |
| Height (cm) | 174 ± 11 |
| Weight (kg) | 70 ± 10 |
| BSA (m2) | 1.9 ± 0.2 |
Data are mean ± SD, unless otherwise indicated. BSA, body surface area.
Postrace and follow-up CMR imaging parameters.
| Variables | Postrace ( | Follow-up ( | |
| Heart rate, bpm | 62 ± 5 | 58 ± 7 | NS |
| LVEDVI, ml/m2 | 87 ± 14 | 100 ± 16 | NS |
| LVESVI, ml/m2 | 33 ± 9 | 37 ± 11 | NS |
| LVSVI, ml/m2 | 54 ± 11 | 63 ± 8 | NS |
| LVEF, % | 62 ± 5 | 63 ± 5 | NS |
| LVCI, L/min/m2 | 3.4 ± 0.5 | 3.5 ± 0.5 | NS |
| LV mass index, g/m2 | 69 ± 13 | 68 ± 13 | NS |
| LVSV/ESV | 1.8 ± 0.8 | 1.8 ± 0.6 | NS |
| RVEDVI, ml/m2 | 88 ± 18 | 98 ± 22 | NS |
| RVESVI, ml/m2 | 36 ± 14 | 34 ± 14 | NS |
| RVSVI, ml/m2 | 52 ± 12 | 63 ± 13 | NS |
| RVEF, % | 59 ± 6 | 65 ± 6 | NS |
| RVCI, L/min/m2 | 3.2 ± 0.5 | 3.5 ± 0.7 | NS |
| RVSV/ESV | 1.6 ± 1 | 2 ± 0.6 | NS |
| Edema, % of LV mass | 12 ± 6 | 3 ± 3 | <0.001 |
| Edema, g | 16 ± 7 | 4 ± 4 | <0.001 |
| LGE, n (%) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | NS |
CMR, cardiovascular magnetic resonance; ESV, end-systolic volume; HR, heart rate; bpm, beats per minute; LGE, late gadolinium enhancement; LVCI, left ventricular cardiac index; LVEDVI, left ventricular end-diastolic volume index; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVESVI, left ventricular end-systolic volume index; LVSV, left ventricular stroke volume; LVSV/ESV, left ventriculo-arterial coupling; LVSVI, left ventricular stroke volume index; RVCI, right ventricular cardiac index; RVEDVI, right ventricular end-diastolic volume index; RVEF, right ventricular ejection fraction; RVESVI, right ventricular end-systolic volume index; RVSV, right ventricular stroke volume; RVSV/ESV, right ventriculo-arterial coupling; RVSVI, right ventricular stroke volume index.
Regional distribution of myocardial edema: Postrace vs. follow-up.
| Myocardial edema by T2W-STIR | Postrace | Follow-up | |||
| Basal segments, % of LV mass | 5.6 ± 4 | 1.6 ± 1.1 | 0.007 | NS | <0.001 |
| Mid-cavity segments, % of LV mass | 3.8 ± 2 | 1.3 ± 1.8 | 0.007 | ||
| Apical segments, % of LV mass | 1.0 ± 1 | 0.4 ± 0.7 | NS | ||
| Basal segments, g | 7 ± 5 | 1.9 ± 1.3 | 0.006 | NS | <0.001 |
| Mid-cavity segments, g | 4.9 ± 2.7 | 1.5 ± 2.3 | 0.004 | ||
| Apical segments, g | 1.4 ± 1.4 | 0.4 ± 0.7 | NS | ||
| Base-to-apex gradient, % of LV mass | 4.6 ± 4.3 | 1.2 ± 0.9 | 0.026 | − | − |
| Base-to-apex gradient, g | 5.6 ± 5.3 | 1.5 ± 1.1 | 0.027 | − | − |
bt-test post-race vs. follow-up; *ANOVA inter-slice comparison analysis at follow-up; §ANOVA inter-slice comparison analysis post-race.
FIGURE 1Left ventricular rotation and twist: Postrace vs. 30-day follow-up. *P < 0.05.
FIGURE 3Radial strain: Postrace vs. 30-day follow-up. Feature tracking analysis confirmed tagging evidence of reversible reduction of basal radial strain in the same subject as Figure 2.
FIGURE 2Myocardial tagging: Postrace vs. 30-day follow-up. The radial strain of the basal slice was lower in the postrace than at 30-day follow-up, as demonstrated by the deformation of the tag lines (top rows). Apical twisting was higher in the postrace (left panels) compared with 30-day follow-up (right panels).
Global and regional analysis of left ventricular strain and rotational mechanics.
| Myocardial deformation parameters | Postrace | Follow-up | |||
| Global radial strain, % | 46 ± 7 | 51 ± 8 | NS | − | − |
| Global longitudinal strain, % | −28 ± 9 | −28 ± 5 | NS | − | − |
| Global circumferential strain, % | −21 ± 4 | −21 ± 3 | NS | − | − |
| Basal radial strain, % | 28 ± 7 | 47 ± 10 | 0.003 | NS | <0.001 |
| Mid-cavity radial strain, % | 54 ± 12 | 57 ± 10 | NS | ||
| Apical radial strain, % | 54 ± 6 | 49 ± 8 | NS | ||
| Basal longitudinal strain, % | −28 ± 12 | −29 ± 5 | NS | NS | NS |
| Mid-cavity longitudinal strain, % | −28 ± 7 | −27 ± 5 | NS | ||
| Apical longitudinal strain, % | −27 ± 9 | −27 ± 6 | NS | ||
| Basal circumferential strain, % | −20.6 ± 2.8 | −20 ± 3 | NS | NS | NS |
| Mid-cavity circumferential strain, % | −22.3 ± 2.8 | −23 ± 2 | NS | ||
| Apical circumferential strain, % | −23.3 ± 3.5 | −20 ± 3 | NS | ||
| Basal rotation, ° | −2.4 ± 1.9 | −1.8 ± 1.7 | NS | − | − |
| Apical rotation, ° | 7.8 ± 2.2 | 2.8 ± 1.3 | <0.001 | − | − |
| Twist, ° | 10.2 ± 2.9 | 4.6 ± 2.2 | 0.009 | − | − |
bt-test post-race vs. follow-up; *ANOVA inter-slice comparison analysis at follow-up; §ANOVA inter-slice comparison analysis postrace.
FIGURE 4Reversible myocardial edema in master triathletes: Postrace vs. 30-day follow-up.
FIGURE 5Regional distribution of myocardial edema in the postrace. *P < 0.05.
FIGURE 6Myocardial edema: Postrace vs. 30-day follow-up. Example of postrace and 30-day follow-up resting T2-STIR images (basal, middle, and apical slices from the complete dataset of short-axis views). Edema was evaluated semi-quantitatively as signal intensity (SI) greater than mean + 2 SD. As shown in the left panels, edema was detected in the postrace acquisition and not at rest (right panels). Moreover, a basal-to-apex gradient was found as the SI ratio basal/apex was greater in postrace than at 30-day follow-up.
FIGURE 7Regional distribution of myocardial edema: Postrace vs. 30-day follow-up. Myocardial edema was detected as a region with signal intensity > mean + 2 SD of normal myocardium. The extent of myocardial edema within each slice was expressed as % of the entire LV mass.
FIGURE 8Relationship between longitudinal changes in radial strain and myocardial edema. (A) Relationship between temporal changes (postrace vs. follow-up) in the radial strain of left ventricular basal segments and the basal-to-apical gradient of myocardial edema. (B) Relationship between temporal changes (postrace vs. follow-up) in the radial strain and myocardial edema of left ventricular basal segments.