Constantin von Deuster1,2, Eva Sammut1, Christian T. Stoeck1,2, Reza Razavi1, and Sebastian Kozerke1,2
1Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London, London, United Kingdom, 2Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University and ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Synopsis
In vivo
cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) was employed to study dynamic alterations
of myocardial microstructure in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) relative
to healthy controls using dual-phase cardiac DTI. A reduction in dynamic change
of fiber orientation between diastole and systole compared to the controls was observed.
Steeper
diastolic helix angles in DCM patients relative to controls were associated
with a larger pre-stretch of the left ventricle. It is speculated that this
larger pre-stretch alongside with reduced myocyte shortening compromises the
ability to dynamically reorient fiber aggregates during systolic contraction.Introduction
In vivo
cardiac Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) has evolved significantly in recent
years. Imaging of the complex cardiac fiber architecture in healthy
1-3
and diseased human hearts
4-7 has been reported. Ex vivo DTI in animal models of failing hearts has indicated the occurrence of
alterations in the cardiac fiber network
8,9.
The objective of the present
work was to study the dynamic changes of myocardial fiber aggregate architecture
in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) using dual-phase cardiac DTI and
compare findings with data from healthy controls.
Methods
Nine DCM patients (age 60±14 years,
weight 75±16kg, heart rate 68±12beats/min) and 9 healthy controls (age 50±6years,
weight 68±13kg, heart rate 63±7beats/min) were studied using dual-phase
stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM) DTI on 1.5T Philips Achieva systems
(Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands) equipped with 32 channel cardiac receiver
arrays. The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committees and written
informed consent according to institutional guidelines was obtained prior to
imaging.
DTI acquisition was ECG
triggered to peak systole and mid diastole. Quiescent systolic and diastolic time
points were determined based on cine images acquired with a temporal resolution
of 10ms. Diffusion weighted imaging was performed using respiratory navigator-gated
breath-holding with an acceptance window of 5 mm. The imaging plane was placed in
short axis view orientation at a mid-ventricular level with the following
imaging parameters: field-of-view (FOV): 309×129mm
2, in-plane
resolution: 2.5×2.5mm
2, slice thickness: 8mm, TE/TR 18ms/2R-R intervals,
partial Fourier factor 0.65. Ten optimized diffusion directions
10
with a b-value of 350s/mm
2 were acquired per breathhold. A total of
eight signal averages per diffusion encoding direction was collected resulting
in eight breathholds per slice. Prior to tensor calculation, diffusion weighted
images were aligned by affine image registration
11. Systolic diffusion
tensors were corrected for myocardial strain as described previously
3. To assess cardiac function, a
contiguous stack of short-axis cine images ranging from apex to base (spatial/temporal
resolution:1.6x1.6x8mm
3/30ms) was acquired. Three-dimensional tagging
data were acquired for diffusion tensor strain correction4 and
cardiac motion analysis. Motion data were obtained during breath holding using
complementary spatial modulation of magnetization (CSPAMM, spatial/temporal
resolution: 3.5x7.7x7.7mm
3/18ms, FOV: 108x108x108mm
3)
12.
Geometrical stack alignment of all tagged volume images
was performed by incorporating navigator offsets and rigid image registration. Data analysis was performed on the local helix
elevation (helix angle) and the corresponding normalized slope from endo- to
epicardium was computed (helix angle slope) (Fig1 a,b). Cardiac function was assessed
based on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), maximum torsion
13,
longitudinal, radial and circumferential strain as derived from 3D tagging
data.
Results
Figure 2 compares helix angle
maps in diastole and systole in a DCM patient relative to data of a healthy
control. In the DCM case steeper helix angle slopes are observed. In Figure 3
and 4 all data points are pooled. DCM patients show steeper diastolic helix
angle slopes when compared to healthy controls (1.16±0.35 vs. 0.85±0.10, p<0.01).
While a significant increase in helix angle slope from diastole to systole was
found in the controls (0.85±0.10 vs. 1.06±0.17, p<0.001), no significant difference was seen in the DCM patient
population (1.16±0.35 vs. 1.15±0.36, p=0.66). LVEF in the DCM patients was
significantly lower compared with healthy controls (37±12% vs. 60±4%,
p<0.001). Similarly, peak cardiac torsion values in patients were found to
be significantly lower compared to the control subjects (0.17±0.10 °/mm vs. 0.30±0.05
°/mm, p<0.001). Figure 4 summarizes the results of torsion and strain
parameters. All strain metrics reveal a significant attenuation in the DCM
patients when compared to data of the control group.
Discussion
Dual-phase cardiac
diffusion tensor imaging has successfully been applied to probe the dynamic
changes of fiber aggregate helix slopes between diastole and systole in DCM
patients relative to controls. The steeper diastolic helix angles in DCM
patients relative to controls are associated with larger pre-stretch of the
left ventricle. It is speculated that this larger pre-stretch alongside with
reduced myocyte shortening compromises the ability to dynamically reorient
fiber aggregates during systolic contraction as evidenced by the data of this
study. The finding may be seen as a hallmark of overall reduced mechanical work
as measured in this patient population. However, further studies and analyses
are warranted to elucidate whether the changes in dynamic fiber orientation are
compensatory or maladaptive depending on the stage of DCM progression. ES and CvD contributed equally
to this work.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by UK
EPSRC (EP/I018700/1).References
1. Edelman R, Gaa J, Wedeen VJ, et al. In vivo measurement of water
diffusion in the human heart. Magn Reson Med 1994;32:423–428.
2. Nielles-Vallespin S, Mekkaoui C, Gatehouse P, et
al. In vivo diffusion tensor MRI of the human heart: Reproducibility of
breath-hold and navigator-based approaches. Magn Reson Med 2013;70:454–465.
3. Stoeck CT, Kalinowska A, von Deuster C, et al.
Dual-phase cardiac diffusion tensor imaging with strain correction. PLoS One
2014;9: e107159.
4. McGill LA, Ismail TF, Nielles-Vallespin S, et al. Reproducibility
of in-vivo diffusion tensor cardiovascular magnetic resonance in hypertrophic
cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2012;14:86.
5. Ferreira PF, Kilner
PJ, McGill LA, et al. In vivo cardiovascular magnetic
resonance diffusion tensor imaging shows evidence of abnormal
myocardial laminar orientations and mobility in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J
Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2014 Nov 12;16:87.
6. Nguyen C, Fan Z, Xie Y, et al. In vivo
contrast free chronic myocardial infarction characterization using
diffusion-weighted cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J. Cardiovasc. Magn.
Reson. 2014;16:1–10.
7. Tseng W-YI, Dou J, Reese TG, Wedeen VJ. Imaging
myocardial fiber disarray and intramural strain hypokinesis in hypertrophic
cardiomyopathy with MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;23:1–8.
8. Helm P a., Younes L, Beg MF, et al. Evidence of
structural remodeling in the dyssynchronous failing heart. Circ.
Res. 2006;98:125–132.
9. Sosnovik DE, Wang R, Dai G, et al. Diffusion
spectrum MRI tractography reveals the presence of a complex network of residual
myofibers in infarcted myocardium. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:206–212.
10. Jones DK, Horsfield M a, Simmons a. Optimal
strategies for measuring diffusion in anisotropic systems by magnetic resonance
imaging. Magn Reson Med 1999;42:515–525.
11. Klein S, Staring M, Murphy K, et al. Elastix: a
Toolbox for Intensity-Based Medical Image Registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging
2010;29:196–205.
12. Rutz AK, Ryf S, Plein S, et al. Accelerated
whole-heart 3D CSPAMM for myocardial motion quantification. Magn Reson Med
2008;59:755–63.
13. Stuber M, Scheidegger MB, et al. Alterations in
the Local Myocardial Motion Pattern in Patients Suffering From Pressure
Overload Due to Aortic Stenosis. Circulation 1999;100:361–368.