Aortic hemodynamics in pediatric Marfan patients compared to healthy pediatric subjects: heterogeneity in the Marfan population
Roel LF van der Palen1,2, Alex J Barker2, Emilie Bollache2, Michael J Rose3, Pim van Ooij4, Julio Garcia2, Luciana Young5, Arno AW Roest1, Michael Markl2,6, Cynthia K Rigsby3, and Joshua D Robinson5,7

1Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Willem-Alexander Children and Youth Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands, 2Department of Radiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States, 3Department of Medical Imaging, Ann & Robert Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States, 4Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 5Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Ann & Robert Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States, 6Department of Biomedical Engineering, McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States, 7Department of Pediatrics, Ann & Robert Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States

Synopsis

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a connective tissue disease with high risk of aortic dissection/rupture. Two-thirds of dissections occur in the ascending aorta, one-third in the descending aorta. Diameter plays an important role in risk stratification. However, recent literature has shown diameter only accounts for 50% of the dissections in the descending aortic region. It is not well known how aortic hemodynamics interact with the altered vascular structure of these aortas and how it may impact dilatation. A cohort of MFS children and an age appropriate control group were evaluated with 4D flow MRI: already distinct abnormalities are present in childhood.

Purpose:

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a connective tissue disease with high risk of aortic rupture and aortic dissection. Two-thirds of dissections occur in the ascending aorta (AAo) with one-third occurring in the descending aorta (DAo). Diameter plays an important role in risk stratification and preventive aortic root replacement based on aortic diameter has successfully reduced adverse events in the ascending aorta. However, recent literature has shown diameter only accounts for 50% of the dissections in the DAo region1. It is not well known how aortic hemodynamics interact with the altered vascular structure of these aortas. One such hemodynamic parameter, wall shear stress (WSS), has been associated with vascular wall remodelling2 and may impact aortic dilatation. Therefore, WSS might be an important parameter to better understand disease progression in MFS patients. The aim of this study was to apply aortic 4D flow MRI3 for the analysis of aortic hemodynamics in a cohort of children and adolescents with MFS compared to an age appropriate control cohort.

Methods:

25 pediatric MFS patients (age 15.6±4.0 yrs, female=11) and 21 healthy subjects (age 16.0±2.6 yrs, female=12) with a tricuspid aortic valve were included in this IRB-approved study. Marfan syndrome was identified according to the 2010 Revised Ghent Criteria4; FBN1 mutation was proven in 21 patients. 4D flow MRI was performed at 1.5T with full 3D coverage of the thoracic aorta (spatial resolution=2.2-4.1x1.6-2.5x1.9-4.0 mm3; temporal resolution=37.6-40.8 ms) using prospective ECG gating and respiratory navigator gating. All 4D flow MRI data were corrected for velocity aliasing, Maxwell terms and eddy currents5. 3D PC-MR angiograms were used to segment the thoracic aorta in 3D (Mimics, Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) (Figure 1B). Systolic 3D WSS along the entire aorta lumen surface was calculated from the 4D flow dataset using a previously described algorithm6 (Figure 1C). Mean systolic wall shear stress (meanWSSsyst) was determined in 10 aortic segments based on anatomic landmarks (Figure 1D). Clinically performed ECG gated and navigator triggered contrast enhanced MRA data was used to measure aortic diameters at the levels illustrated in Figure 1B, according to the international guidelines7. To account for the range of patient age and body size, aortic Z-scores were calculated for each patient from MRI aortic measurements and body surface area (BSA) using EchoIMS (Merge Healthcare, Chicago, IL). An aortic Z-score ≥2.0 indicates aortic dilatation. The subgroup of the Marfan patients with DAo Z-scores ≥2.0 were analyzed separately.

Results:

Age, gender and BSA were comparable between the MFS subgroup with dilated proximal DAo and the other groups (Table 1). As summarized in Figure 2A, Marfan patients had reduced meanWSSsyst in the proximal AAo outer segment (0.65±0.12 Pa, p=0.045) and proximal DAo inner segment (0.74±0.17 Pa, p=0.031) and higher meanWSSsyst in the inner segment of the distal AAo (0.94±0.14 Pa, p=0.031) compared to healthy subjects. Subgroup analysis of those Marfan patients with proximal DAo Z-score ≥2.0 (n=7) showed significantly lower meanWSSsyst in many of the aortic segments compared to the Marfan patients with proximal DAo Z-score <2.0 (n=18; 8/10 segments) and compared to the group of healthy subjects (n=21; 4/10 segments) (p=0.002–0.046) (Figure 2B-C). The MFS subgroup (proximal DAo Z-score ≥2.0) had significantly greater Z-scores at nearly all levels of thoracic aorta compared to both other groups (Table 1). For the entire cohort (MFS and healthy subjects) meanWSSsyst showed a strong relationship with aortic dimensions (Z-scores as well as % diameter difference within segments). The most prominent association was found between the meanWSSsyst and the proximal DAo inner segment and the diameter difference isthmus-proximal DAo (Figure 3). 3D streamline visualisation showed marked vortex flow patterns in the proximal DAo in the Marfan patients with dilated proximal DAo (Figure 4).

Discussion/Conclusion:

MFS patients demonstrated significantly lower meanWSSsyst at segments in the proximal AAo and proximal DAo. These regions in the aorta correspond to the locations where aortic dissection and/or aortic rupture often originate. The subgroup of Marfan patients with already dilated proximal DAo showed prominently lower meanWSSsyst values in many of the aortic segments compared to other groups, and were associated with regional aortic size. These data suggest that Marfan syndrome consists of a heterogeneous group of patients in terms of cardiovascular hemodynamics and aortic diameters, and one in which distinct abnormalities are already present in childhood. Based on these data, one might speculate that Marfan patients with proximal DAo Z-score ≥2.0 are at higher risk of adverse (cardio)vascular events compared to Marfan patients with normal DAo dimensions. Additional longitudinal studies are warranted to further investigate the diagnostic value of inter-individual differences in MFS hemodynamics.

Acknowledgements

Grant supported by Netherlands Heart Foundation 2014T087, Ter Meulen Grant-KNAW 15/275, NIH R01HL115828.

References

1. den Hartog AW, Franken R, Zwinderman AH et al. The risk for type B aortic dissection in Marfan syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 65:246-54

2. Guzzardi DG, Barker AJ, van Ooij P et al. Valve-Related Hemodynamics Mediate Human Bicuspid Aortopathy: Insights From Wall Shear Stress Mapping. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 66:892–900

3. Markl M, Frydrychowicz A, Kozerke S et al. 4D flow MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 36:1015-36

4. Loeys BL, Dietz HC, Braverman AC et al. The revised Ghent nosology for the Marfan syndrome. J Med Genet. 2010 Jul; 47(7):476-85

5. Bock J, Kreher B, Hennig J, Markl M. Optimized pre-processing of time-resolved 2d and 3d phase contrast mri data. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Berlin, Germany. 2007:3138

6. Potters WV et al. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013

7. Hiratzka LF, Bakris GL, Beckman JA et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Apr 6;55(14):e27-e129

Figures

Figure 1. Post-processing and analysis. A) Velocity and magnitude information. B) Volumetric aorta segmentation; levels of aortic diameter measurements. C) Calculation 3D WSS vector maps. D) Regional WSS analysis – 10 segments: Proximal AAo – inner (1), outer segment (2); Distal AAo – inner (3), outer segment (4); Arch – inner (5), outer segment (6); Proximal DAo – inner (7), outer segment (8); Distal DAo – inner (9), outer segment (10).

Figure 2. Mean systolic wall shear stress (meanWSSsyst) (Pa) in 10 aortic segments for group comparison. A) Entire MFS group (n=25) vs healthy subjects (NL; n=21); B) MFS-pDAo Z-score ≥2.0 (n=7) vs MFS-pDAo Z-score <2.0 (n=18); C) MFS-pDAo Z-score ≥2.0 (n=7) vs healthy subjects (NL; n=21).

Figure 3. Relationship between Mean WSSsyst and diameter difference Isthmus - proximal DAo segment (%) in MFS patients and healthy subjects.

Figure 4. Streamline visualisation of group MFS-pDAo Z-score ≥2.0 (n=7). Local vortex at inner curvature of the proximal DAo (arrow) in 6 out of 7 patients. Vel= Velocity in m/s.

Table 1. Basic characteristics and thoracic aortic dimensions within groups. Group 1: MFS-pDAo Z-score ≥2.0; Group 2: MFS-pDAo Z-score <2.0; Group 3: Healthy subjects. Difference compared to group 2: * P<0.05, ** P<0.001. Difference compared to group 3: # P<0.05, ## P<0.001.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
2714