Key result
Non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients had significantly lower LV twist (6.0° vs. 8.8°, P=0.023) and torsion (5.9° vs. 8.8°, P=0.017) compared to ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients.
Why the study?
Does cardiovascular magnetic resonance with tissue tagging differentiate ischaemic from non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy based on torsion and strain parameters?
Population
53 patients with heart failure secondary to left ventricular systolic dysfunction from the VINDICATE trial…
Comparison
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 3.0T… vs Ischaemic cardiomyopathy vs. non-ischaemic…
Design
Cross-sectional, CMR data were analysed blinded
Authors
Loading...
CMR twist/torsion differences may aid aetiology differentiation; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Cross-Sectional (n=78)
Blinded
Does cardiovascular magnetic resonance with tissue tagging differentiate ischaemic from non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy based on torsion and strain parameters?
Absolute Event Rate: 6% vs 8.8%
p-value: p=0.023
CMR-derived LV twist and torsion are significantly lower in non-ischaemic compared to ischaemic cardiomyopathy, offering a potential imaging marker to differentiate heart failure aetiologies.
Foley et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (n=78). Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) vs. Ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) was evaluated on LV twist (°) (p=0.023). Non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients had significantly lower LV twist (6.0° vs. 8.8°, P=0.023) and torsion (5.9° vs. 8.8°, P=0.017) compared to ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: