Key result
Myocardial T1-rho values consistently increase across diverse myocardial injuries compared to healthy tissue.
Why the study?
Clinical correlates of myocardial T1ρ and how myocardial T1ρ values change across various clinical scenarios remained to be identified.
Does myocardial T1ρ mapping detect myocardial injuries in patients with structural heart disease compared to healthy controls?
Cross-Sectional (n=110)
No
Does myocardial T1ρ mapping detect myocardial injuries in patients with structural heart disease compared to healthy controls?
p-value: p=<0.05
T1ρ mapping may detect myocardial injury across etiologies in structural heart disease; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before clinical use.
Aims To identify clinical correlates of myocardial T1ρ and to examine how myocardial T1ρ values change under various clinical scenarios. Methods and results A total of 66 patients (26% female, median age 57 years [Q1–Q3, 44–65 years]) with known structural heart disease and 44 controls (50% female, median age 47 years [28–57 years]) underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, including T1ρ mapping, T2 mapping, native T1 mapping, late gadolinium enhancement, and extracellular volume (ECV) imaging. In controls, T1ρ positively related with T2 (P = 0.038) and increased from basal to apical levels (P < 0.001). As compared with controls and remote myocardium, T1ρ significantly increased in all patients’ sub-groups and all types of myocardial injuries: acute and chronic injuries, focal and diffuse tissue abnormalities, as well as ischaemic and non-ischaemic aetiologies (P < 0.05). T1ρ was independently associated with T2 in patients with acute injuries (P = 0.004) and with native T1 and ECV in patients with chronic injuries (P < 0.05). Myocardial T1ρ mapping demonstrated good intra- and inter-observer reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.86 and 0.83, respectively). Conclusion Myocardial T1ρ mapping appears to be reproducible and equally sensitive to acute and chronic myocardial injuries, whether of ischaemic or non-ischaemic origins. It may thus be a contrast-agent-free biomarker for gaining new and quantitative insight into myocardial structural disorders. These findings highlight the need for further studies through prospective and randomized trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bustin et al. (2023) conducted a cross-sectional in Structural heart disease (n=110). Myocardial T1-rho mapping vs. Healthy controls and remote myocardium was evaluated on Myocardial T1-rho values in injured versus remote myocardium and controls (p=<0.05). Myocardial T1-rho values were significantly increased in all types of myocardial injuries compared with controls and remote myocardium.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: