Native T1 time and extracellular volume fraction in differentiation of normal myocardium from non-ischemic dilated and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy myocardium: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cardiac magnetic resonance in hypertrophic and dilated cardiomyopathies

Cardiomyopathies are a heterogeneous entity. The progress in the field of genetics has allowed over the years to determine its origin more and more often. The classification of these pathologies has changed over the years; it has been updated with new knowledge. Imaging allows to define the phenotypic characteristics of the different forms of cardiomyopathy. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) allows a morphological evaluation of the associated (and sometimes pathognomonic) cardiac findings of any form of cardiomyopathy. The tissue characterization sequences also make magnetic resonance imaging unique in its ability to detect changes in myocardial tissue. This review aims to define the features that can be highlighted by CMR in hypertrophic and dilated forms and the possible differential diagnoses. In hypertrophic forms, CMR provides: precise evaluation of wall thickness in all segments, ventricular function and size and evaluation of possible presence of areas of fibrosis as well as changes in myocardial tissue (measurement of T1 mapping and extracellular volume values). In dilated forms, cardiac resonance is the gold standard in the assessment of ventricular volumes. CMR highlights also the potential alterations of the myocardial tissue.

T1 and T2 mapping to detect chronic inflammation in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Aims

The purpose of this retrospective single‐centre study was to evaluate the non‐invasive detection of endomyocardial biopsy (EMB)‐established chronic myocardial inflammation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) using T1 and T2 mapping.

Methods and results

The study population consisted of 52 retrospectively identified HFrEF patients who underwent EMB and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla. EMB was defined according to the position statement of the European Society of Cardiology and served as reference to identify inflammation in all patients. A control group of healthy volunteers with prior cardiac magnetic resonance imaging studies (n = 58) was also identified. Global and segmental T1 and T2 values as well as septal measurements and tissue heterogeneity parameters were calculated.

Out of the 52 patients with HFrEF, 33 patients had myocardial inflammation detected by EMB, while 19 patients were EMB negative for inflammation. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 31% in both groups (P = 0.97). Global T1 and T2 values in HFrEF patients were significantly higher compared with healthy controls (T1 1275 ± 69 ms vs. 1,175 ± 44 ms, P < 0.001; T2 40.0 ± 3.4 ms vs. 37.9 ± 1.6 ms, P < 0.001). The distribution of T1 and T2 values between patients with and without EMB‐proven chronic myocardial inflammation was not statistically different when regarding global (T1 1292 ± 71 ms vs. 1266 ± 67 ms, P = 0.26; T2 40.0 ± 2.6 ms vs. 40.0 ± 3.9 ms, P = 1.0), septal (T1 1299 ± 63 ms vs. 1289 ± 76 ms, P = 0.76; T2 40.1 ± 3.5 ms vs 40.0 ± 6.4 ms, P = 0.49) or maximum segmental values (T1 1414 ± 111 ms vs. 1363 ± 88 ms, P = 0.15; T2 47.3 ± 5.2 ms vs. 48.8 ± 11.8 ms, P = 0.53). Mean absolute deviation of segmental T1 and T2 values and log‐transformed pixel‐wise standard deviation as parameters of tissue heterogeneity did not reveal statistical significant differences between inflammation‐positive and inflammation‐negative HFrEF patients (all P > 0.4).

Conclusions

Conventionally performed quantitative T1 and T2 mapping values significantly correlated with prevalence of HFrEF but did not discriminate HFrEF patients with or without chronic myocardial inflammation in our cohort. This suggests that EMB is the preferred method to detect chronic myocardial inflammation in HFrEF.

Correlation between septal midwall late gadolinium enhancement on CMR and conduction delay on ECG in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy

Background

Septal midwall late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is a characteristic finding in nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and is associated with adverse cardiac events. QRS-prolongation in DCM is also frequently present and a predictor of arrhythmic events and mortality. Since the His-Purkinje fibres are located in the interventricular septum, QRS-prolongation may directly result from septal fibrosis, visualized by LGE. Our aim was to study the correlation of the presence and extent of septal midwall LGE and QRS-duration.

Methods

DCM-patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction (LVEF < 50%) were included. LV volumes, systolic function and nonischemic septal midwall LGE, defined as patchy or stripe-like LGE in the septal segments, were quantified. QRS-duration on standard 12-lead ECG was measured.

Results

165 DCM-patients were included (62% male, mean age 59 ± 15 years) with a median LVEF of 36% [24–44]. Fifty-one patients (31%) demonstrated septal midwall LGE with a median extent of 8.1 gram [4.3–16.8]. Patients with midwall LGE had increased LV end-diastolic volumes (EDV) 248 mL [193–301] vs. 193 mL [160–239], p < 0.001) and lower LVEF (26% [18–35] vs. 40% [32–45], p < 0.001). Median QRS-duration was 110 ms [95–146] without a correlation to the presence nor extent of midwall LGE. QRS-duration was moderately correlated with LV-dilation and mass (respectively r = 0.35, p < 0.001 and r = 0.30, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

In DCM-patients, QRS-prolongation and septal midwall LGE are frequently present and often co-exist. However, they are not correlated. This suggests that the assessment of LGE-CMR has complementary value to ECG evaluation in the clinical assessment and risk stratification of DCM-patients.