Cargando…

Non-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance detection of myocardial fibrosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy

BACKGROUND: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) leads to progressive cardiomyopathy. Detection of myocardial fibrosis with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is critical for clinical management. Due to concerns of brain deposition of gadolinium, non-contrast m...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Raucci, Frank J., Xu, Meng, George-Durrett, Kristen, Crum, Kimberly, Slaughter, James C., Parra, David A., Markham, Larry W., Soslow, Jonathan H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8082768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33910579
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-021-00736-1
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) leads to progressive cardiomyopathy. Detection of myocardial fibrosis with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is critical for clinical management. Due to concerns of brain deposition of gadolinium, non-contrast methods for detecting and monitoring myocardial fibrosis would be beneficial. OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that native T1 mapping and/or circumferential (ε(cc)) and longitudinal (ε(ls)) strain can detect myocardial fibrosis. METHODS: 156 CMRs with gadolinium were performed in 66 DMD boys and included: (1) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), (2) LGE, (3) native T1 mapping and myocardial tagging (ε(cc-tag) measured using harmonic phase analysis). LGE was graded as: (1) presence/absence by segment, slice, and globally; (2) global severity from 0 (no LGE) to 4 (severe); (3) percent LGE using full width half maximum (FWHM). ε(ls) and ε(cc) measured using feature tracking. Regression models to predict LGE included native T1 and either ε(cc-tag) or ε(ls) and ε(cc) measured at each segment, slice, and globally. RESULTS: Mean age and LVEF at first CMR were 14 years and 54%, respectively. Global ε(ls) and ε(cc) strongly predicted presence or absence of LGE (OR 2.6 [1.1, 6.0], p = 0.029, and OR 2.3 [1.0, 5.1], p = 0.049, respectively) while global native T1 did not. Global ε(cc), ε(ls), and native T1 predicted global severity score (OR 2.6 [1.4, 4.8], p = 0.002, OR 2.6 [1.4, 6.0], p = 0.002, and OR 1.8 [1.1, 3.1], p = 0.025, respectively). ε(ls) correlated with change in LGE by severity score (n = 33, 3.8 [1.0, 14.2], p = 0.048) and ε(cc-tag) correlated with change in percent LGE by FWHM (n = 34, OR 0.2 [0.1, 0.9], p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-contrast sequences predict presence and severity of LGE, with ε(ls) and ε(cc) being more predictive in most models, but there was not an observable advantage over using LVEF as a predictor. Change in LGE was predicted by ε(ls) (global severity score) and ε(cc-tag) (FWHM). While statistically significant, our results suggest these sequences are currently not a replacement for LGE and may only have utility in a very limited subset of DMD patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12968-021-00736-1.