Cargando…
Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) contractility and compliance are derived from pressure–volume (PV) loops during dynamic preload reduction, but reliable simultaneous measurements of pressure and volume are challenging with current technologies. We have developed a method to quantify contractility a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9841727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36642713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00913-4 |
_version_ | 1784869957587173376 |
---|---|
author | Seemann, Felicia Bruce, Christopher G. Khan, Jaffar M. Ramasawmy, Rajiv Potersnak, Amanda G. Herzka, Daniel A. Kakareka, John W. Jaimes, Andrea E. Schenke, William H. O’Brien, Kendall J. Lederman, Robert J. Campbell-Washburn, Adrienne E. |
author_facet | Seemann, Felicia Bruce, Christopher G. Khan, Jaffar M. Ramasawmy, Rajiv Potersnak, Amanda G. Herzka, Daniel A. Kakareka, John W. Jaimes, Andrea E. Schenke, William H. O’Brien, Kendall J. Lederman, Robert J. Campbell-Washburn, Adrienne E. |
author_sort | Seemann, Felicia |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) contractility and compliance are derived from pressure–volume (PV) loops during dynamic preload reduction, but reliable simultaneous measurements of pressure and volume are challenging with current technologies. We have developed a method to quantify contractility and compliance from PV loops during a dynamic preload reduction using simultaneous measurements of volume from real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and invasive LV pressures with CMR-specific signal conditioning. METHODS: Dynamic PV loops were derived in 16 swine (n = 7 naïve, n = 6 with aortic banding to increase afterload, n = 3 with ischemic cardiomyopathy) while occluding the inferior vena cava (IVC). Occlusion was performed simultaneously with the acquisition of dynamic LV volume from long-axis real-time CMR at 0.55 T, and recordings of invasive LV and aortic pressures, electrocardiogram, and CMR gradient waveforms. PV loops were derived by synchronizing pressure and volume measurements. Linear regression of end-systolic- and end-diastolic- pressure–volume relationships enabled calculation of contractility. PV loops measurements in the CMR environment were compared to conductance PV loop catheter measurements in 5 animals. Long-axis 2D LV volumes were validated with short-axis-stack images. RESULTS: Simultaneous PV acquisition during IVC-occlusion was feasible. The cardiomyopathy model measured lower contractility (0.2 ± 0.1 mmHg/ml vs 0.6 ± 0.2 mmHg/ml) and increased compliance (12.0 ± 2.1 ml/mmHg vs 4.9 ± 1.1 ml/mmHg) compared to naïve animals. The pressure gradient across the aortic band was not clinically significant (10 ± 6 mmHg). Correspondingly, no differences were found between the naïve and banded pigs. Long-axis and short-axis LV volumes agreed well (difference 8.2 ± 14.5 ml at end-diastole, -2.8 ± 6.5 ml at end-systole). Agreement in contractility and compliance derived from conductance PV loop catheters and in the CMR environment was modest (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.56 and 0.44, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic PV loops during a real-time CMR-guided preload reduction can be used to derive quantitative metrics of contractility and compliance, and provided more reliable volumetric measurements than conductance PV loop catheters. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12968-023-00913-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9841727 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98417272023-01-17 Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization Seemann, Felicia Bruce, Christopher G. Khan, Jaffar M. Ramasawmy, Rajiv Potersnak, Amanda G. Herzka, Daniel A. Kakareka, John W. Jaimes, Andrea E. Schenke, William H. O’Brien, Kendall J. Lederman, Robert J. Campbell-Washburn, Adrienne E. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Research BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) contractility and compliance are derived from pressure–volume (PV) loops during dynamic preload reduction, but reliable simultaneous measurements of pressure and volume are challenging with current technologies. We have developed a method to quantify contractility and compliance from PV loops during a dynamic preload reduction using simultaneous measurements of volume from real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and invasive LV pressures with CMR-specific signal conditioning. METHODS: Dynamic PV loops were derived in 16 swine (n = 7 naïve, n = 6 with aortic banding to increase afterload, n = 3 with ischemic cardiomyopathy) while occluding the inferior vena cava (IVC). Occlusion was performed simultaneously with the acquisition of dynamic LV volume from long-axis real-time CMR at 0.55 T, and recordings of invasive LV and aortic pressures, electrocardiogram, and CMR gradient waveforms. PV loops were derived by synchronizing pressure and volume measurements. Linear regression of end-systolic- and end-diastolic- pressure–volume relationships enabled calculation of contractility. PV loops measurements in the CMR environment were compared to conductance PV loop catheter measurements in 5 animals. Long-axis 2D LV volumes were validated with short-axis-stack images. RESULTS: Simultaneous PV acquisition during IVC-occlusion was feasible. The cardiomyopathy model measured lower contractility (0.2 ± 0.1 mmHg/ml vs 0.6 ± 0.2 mmHg/ml) and increased compliance (12.0 ± 2.1 ml/mmHg vs 4.9 ± 1.1 ml/mmHg) compared to naïve animals. The pressure gradient across the aortic band was not clinically significant (10 ± 6 mmHg). Correspondingly, no differences were found between the naïve and banded pigs. Long-axis and short-axis LV volumes agreed well (difference 8.2 ± 14.5 ml at end-diastole, -2.8 ± 6.5 ml at end-systole). Agreement in contractility and compliance derived from conductance PV loop catheters and in the CMR environment was modest (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.56 and 0.44, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic PV loops during a real-time CMR-guided preload reduction can be used to derive quantitative metrics of contractility and compliance, and provided more reliable volumetric measurements than conductance PV loop catheters. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12968-023-00913-4. BioMed Central 2023-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9841727/ /pubmed/36642713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00913-4 Text en © This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Seemann, Felicia Bruce, Christopher G. Khan, Jaffar M. Ramasawmy, Rajiv Potersnak, Amanda G. Herzka, Daniel A. Kakareka, John W. Jaimes, Andrea E. Schenke, William H. O’Brien, Kendall J. Lederman, Robert J. Campbell-Washburn, Adrienne E. Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
title | Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
title_full | Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
title_fullStr | Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
title_full_unstemmed | Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
title_short | Dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
title_sort | dynamic pressure–volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart catheterization |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9841727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36642713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00913-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT seemannfelicia dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT brucechristopherg dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT khanjaffarm dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT ramasawmyrajiv dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT potersnakamandag dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT herzkadaniela dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT kakarekajohnw dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT jaimesandreae dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT schenkewilliamh dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT obrienkendallj dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT ledermanrobertj dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization AT campbellwashburnadriennee dynamicpressurevolumeloopanalysisbysimultaneousrealtimecardiovascularmagneticresonanceandleftheartcatheterization |