Application of cardiac magnetic resonance cine imaging in diagnosis and treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction
10.16781/j.0258-879x.2017.10.1273
- Author:
Yi-Jing TAO
1
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Sixth People’ Hospital’, Shanghai Jiaotong University
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Cine magnetic resonance;
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction;
Strain;
Volume-time curve
- From:
Academic Journal of Second Military Medical University
2017;38(10):1273-1278
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To explore the role of cine sequence of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in evaluating left ventricular (LV) diastolic function in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods LV two-chamber, three-chamber, four-chamber long-axis and series of short-axis cine images were obtained from 30 patients with HFpEF (HFpEF group) and 15 cases with normal cardiac function (control group) using CMR examination. LV volume-time curve (VTC) and global strain curves were drawn. Peak filling rate and peak filling volume, global longitudinal, global radial, global circumferential peak strain and peak diastolic strain rate were compared between the two groups. Results Compared with the control group, LV remodeling index (LVRI) in the HFpEF group was significantly increased (0.86±0.15 vs 0.73±0.08, P<0.05), first peak filling rate/second peak filling rate (PFR1/PFR2) was significantly decreased or even inverted (0.74 ±0.14 vs 1.43±0.34, P=0.001), and first filling volume (FV1) and FV1/total filling volume (FV1/FV) were significantly decreased (26.24±9.74 vs 31.30±5.17, P<0.05; 0.59±0.05 vs 0.69±0.03, P<0.05). Global longitudinal peak strain (GLS) ([-14.96±1.79]% vs[-20.96±0.84]%,P<0.01), global longitudinal diastolic peak strain rate (0.65±0.16 vs 1.29±0.27, P<0.05), global radial diastolic peak strain rate (-2.23±0.71 vs -3.80±1.13, P<0.05) and global circumferential diastolic peak strain rate (GDCSR) (1.02±0.14 vs 1.77±0.63, P<0.05) in the HFpEF group were significantly decreased versus control group. Conclusion LVRI, PFR1/PFR2, FV1 and GDCSR obtained by CMR can accurately evaluate the changes of LV diastolic function in HFpEF, which may play important roles in the diagnosis and treatment of HFpEF.
