Does cardiac magnetic resonance tissue tracking (CMR-TT) accurately evaluate and detect early cardiac insufficiency in patients with HFpEF post-myocardial infarction?
CMR-TT derived LV strain parameters can detect early cardiac insufficiency and discriminate HFpEF from non-HF in patients with chronic myocardial infarction.
Background: This study aimed to explore the value of cardiac magnetic resonance tissue tracking (CMR-TT) technology in evaluating heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in patients with chronic myocardial infarction (CMI). Methods: Between June 2016 and March 2022, we included a consecutive series of 92 patients with CMI and 40 healthy controls in this retrospective study. The CMI patients enrolled were divided into different subgroups HFpEF-CMI group (n=54) and non- heart failure (HF)-CMI group (n=38) according to the Heart Failure Association (HFA)-PEFF (step 1: P, pre-test assessment; step 2: E, echocardiography and natriuretic peptide score; step 3: F1, functional testing; step 4: F2, final aetiology) diagnostic algorithm. CMR scan was performed at the First Hospital of China Medical University. Quantitative measurements of myocardial damage, such as myocardial strain parameters of both ventricles derived by CMR-TT and infarct size and transmurality by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), were assessed. One-way analysis of variance, independent samples t-test, and rank sum test were used to compare myocardial impairment among groups. Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficient was used to measure correlations between left ventricular (LV) strains and clinical and functional parameters. Logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were performed to identify the best parameter for diagnosing HFpEF-CMI. Results: HFpEF-CMI patients demonstrated significantly impaired LV strains and strain rates in all of the three directions (radial, circumferential and longitudinal) compared to non-HF-CMI patients and healthy controls (P<0.001 for all), whereas only global longitudinal strain (GLS) was significantly impaired in HFpEF-CMI patients vs. controls for right ventricular strain parameters (P<0.001). LV strains showed moderate correlation with N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (radial, circumferential and longitudinal strain, R=−0.401, R=0.408, R=0.407, respectively, P<0.001 for all). LV strains in the three directions (radial, circumferential and longitudinal) area under ROC curve (AUC) =0.707, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.603–0.797; AUC =0.708, 95% CI: 0.604–0.798; AUC =0.731, 95% CI: 0.628–0.818; respectively, P<0.01 for all were discriminators for HFpEF-CMI and non-HF-CMI. LV strains and myocardial infarction volume were independent factors in multi-logistic regression analysis after adjusting for body mass index, age, and sex (P<0.05 for all). Conclusions: CMR-TT provides clinicians with useful additional imaging parameters to facilitate the assessment of CMI patients with HFpEF. LV strain parameters can detect early cardiac insufficiency in patients with HFpEF-CMI and have potential value for discriminating between HFpEF and non-HF patients post-CMI.
Li et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: