Key result
Maximum myocardial torsion measured by tissue phase mapping was significantly lower in patients with reduced ejection fraction compared to healthy controls (0.21 vs. 0.36 °/mm, p=0.018).
Why the study?
Does tissue phase mapping cardiovascular magnetic resonance detect differences in left ventricular torsion between patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and normal volunteers?
Cross-Sectional (n=41)
No
Does tissue phase mapping cardiovascular magnetic resonance detect differences in left ventricular torsion between patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and normal volunteers?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.21% vs 0.36%
p-value: p=0.018
Tissue phase mapping CMR can quantify significant differences in left ventricular torsion, including endocardial vs epicardial differences, in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy compared to healthy controls.
Tissue phase mapping CMR detects reduced LV torsion in reduced EF; leaves open its diagnostic role in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy pending validation.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this work is to analyze differences in left ventricular torsion between volunteers and patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy based on tissue phase mapping (TPM) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). METHODS: TPM was performed on 27 patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and 14 normal volunteers. Patients underwent a standard CMR including late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) for the assessment of myocardial scar and ECG-gated cine CMR for global cardiac function. TPM was acquired in short-axis orientation at base, mid, and apex for all subjects. After evaluation by experienced observers, the patients were divided in subgroups according to the presence or absence of LGE (LGE+/LGE-), local wall motion abnormalities (WM+/WM-), and having a preserved (≥50%) or reduced (<50%) ejection fraction (EF+/EF-). TPM data was semi-automatically segmented and global LV torsion was computed for each cardiac time frame for endocardial and epicardial layers, and for the entire myocardium. RESULTS: Maximum myocardial torsion was significantly lower for patients with reduced EF compared to controls (0.21 ± 0.15°/mm vs. 0.36 ± 0.11°/mm, p = 0.018), but also for patients with wall motion abnormalities (0.21 ± 0.13°/mm vs. 0.36 ± 0.11°/mm, p = 0.004). Global myocardial torsion showed a positive correlation (r = 0.54, p < 0.001) with EF. Moreover, endocardial torsion was significantly higher than epicardial torsion for EF+ subjects (0.56 ± 0.33°/mm vs. 0.34 ± 0.18°/mm, p = 0.039) and for volunteers (0.46 ± 0.16°/mm vs. 0.30 ± 0.09°/mm, p = 0.004). The difference in maximum torsion between endo- and epicardial layers was positively correlated with EF (r = 0.47, p = 0.002) and age (r = 0.37, p = 0.016) for all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: TPM can be used to detect significant differences in LV torsion in patients with reduced EF and in the presence of local wall motion abnormalities. We were able to quantify torsion differences between the endocardium and epicardium, which vary between patient subgroups and are correlated to age and EF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chițiboi et al. (2016) conducted a cross-sectional in Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n=41). Tissue phase mapping (TPM) cardiovascular magnetic resonance vs. Healthy volunteers was evaluated on Maximum myocardial torsion (Tmax) in °/mm (p=0.018). Maximum myocardial torsion measured by tissue phase mapping was significantly lower in patients with reduced ejection fraction compared to healthy controls (0.21 vs. 0.36 °/mm, p=0.018).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: