Key result
AF and VHD linked to ~83% lower left atrial total strain versus healthy controls.
Why the study?
AF is common in VHD and associated with adverse outcomes, motivating evaluation of LA function in AF-VHD using CMR feature tracking.
Does cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking (CMR-FT) identify left atrial dysfunction in patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease compared to healthy controls?
Cross-Sectional (n=54)
No
Does cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking (CMR-FT) identify left atrial dysfunction in patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease compared to healthy controls?
Absolute Event Rate: 6.55% vs 38%
p-value: p=<0.001
CMR-FT can noninvasively identify left atrial dysfunction and deformation in patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease.
CMR-FT may support noninvasive LA dysfunction detection in AF with valvular disease; leaves open prognostic value pending prospective studies.
Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common arrhythmia in valvular heart disease (VHD) and is associated with adverse outcomes. Hypothesis To evaluate the left atrial (LA) function in patients with AF‐VHD by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking (CMR‐FT) using LA strain ( ε s / ε e / ε a ) and their corresponding strain rate (SRs/SRe/SRa). Methods This was a retrospective cross‐sectional inter‐reader and intra‐reader reproducibility conducted from July 1, 2020, to January 31, 2021. A total of 39 patients with AF‐VHD (rheumatic heart valvular disease [RHVD] [ n = 22], degenerative heart valvular disease [DHVD] [ n = 17]) underwent MRI scans performed with drug‐controlled heart rate before correcting the rhythm and valves through maze procedure. Fifteen participants with normal cardiac MRI were included as healthy control. ε s /SRs, ε e /SRe, and ε a /SRa, corresponding to LA reservoir, conduit, and booster‐pump function, were assessed using Feature Tracking software (CVI42 v5.12.1). Results Compared with healthy controls, LA global strain parameters ( ε s / ε e / ε a /SRs/SRe/SRa) were significantly decreased (all p < 0.001), while LA size and volume were increased in AF‐VHD group (all p < 0.001). In the subgroup, RHVD group showed lower LA total ejection fraction (LATEF) and strain data than DHVD group (12.6% ± 3.3% vs. 19.4 ± 8.6, p = 0.001). Decreased LATEF was significantly related to altered LA strain and strain rate, especially in ε s , ε e , and SRs (Pearson/Spearman r/ρ = 0.856/0.837/0.562, respectively; all p < 0.001). Interstudy and intrastudy reproducibility were consistent for LA volumetry and strain parameters (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.88–0.99). Conclusions CMR‐FT can be used to assess the LA strain parameters, and identify LA dysfunction and deformation noninvasively, which could be a helpful functional imaging biomarker in the clinical treatment of AF‐VHD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hou et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease (n=54). Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking (CMR-FT) vs. Healthy controls was evaluated on Left atrial total strain (εs) (p=<0.001). Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging feature tracking revealed that patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease had significantly decreased left atrial total strain compared to healthy controls (6.55% vs 38.0%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: