Cardiac
Arunark Kolipaka

Synopsis

Estimating the stiffness of left ventricle and aorta provides important information in diagnosing various cardiovascular diseases. MR elastography (MRE) is a noninvasive technique to estimate the stiffness of soft tissues. This abstract will demonstrate the principle and application of MRE for diagnosing cardiovascular diseases.

Why estimating LV and aortic stifffness?

Cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Ventricular-vascular coupling i.e. functional properties of both the organs in conjunction play an important role in different disease states including hypertension, aortic stenosis etc. One of the mechanical properties i.e. myocardial stiffness is a major determinant of cardiac function and is increased in many diseases including the spectrum of ischemia [1], diastolic dysfunction [2], hypertension [3], and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy [4]. Similarly, aortic wall stiffness is a fundamental biomechanical parameter that reflects the structural integrity aortic tissue. Aortic compliance and distensibility reflect overall wall stiffness, an extremely important and fundamental parameter altered in multiple diseases including hypertension, coronary artery disease, and aortic aneurysm formation [5]. Therefore, it is important to estimate the stiffness of heart and aorta, noninvasively.

Existing Methods to Estimate Stiffness

To date, myocardial stiffness can only be measured with ex-vivo mechanical testing [6] or in-vivo by indirectly inferring it from pressure-volume (P-V) relationships [7]. However, P-V methods are: invasive; assess only global LV chamber, rather than the true intrinsic properties of the myocardium [7]. A non-invasive method for assessing true myocardial stiffness does not yet exist. Similarly, aortic stiffness has been measured with catheter [8] or ultrasound-based methods, such as pulse-wave velocity (PWV) [9] or pulse-wave imaging (PWI) [10], or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based PWV [11]. Catheter-based methods are invasive and provide only a global indirect measure of stiffness. Non-invasive ultrasound methods provide only an indirect estimation based on wave velocity in peripheral arteries [12], which is a poor reflection of central aortic stiffness [13]. PWI is limited by acoustic window, is one-dimensional, has limited imaging depth [14]. Similarly, MRI-based measurement of PWV provides only an indirect global estimate of aortic wall stiffness.

Magnetic Resonance Elastography and its applications

Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) is a novel, noninvasive technique to estimate the stiffness of soft tissues [5, 15]. In MRE, an external motion is synchronized with the motion encoding gradients using a phase contrast MRI sequence to encode the waves in the phase of an MR image. These wave images are processed using a mathematical algorithm to obtain the stiffness maps. These stiffness maps are spatially and temporally resolved. This abstract will present the application of MRE and its validation against gold standard techniques in the heart and aorta. First, the validation of MRE in animal models such as diastolic dysfunction, myocardial infarction, hypertension, aortic aneurysms will be presented and eventually its application in normal subjects then in patients with disease conditions. Additionally, this abstract will also present the future work.

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge NIH grant funding R01HL124096 and American Heart Association grant funding 13SDG14690027

References

1. Pislaru, C., et al., Ultrasound strain imaging of altered myocardial stiffness: stunned versus infarcted reperfused myocardium. Circulation, 2004. 109(23): p. 2905-10.

2. Zile, M.R., et al., Diastolic heart failure--abnormalities in active relaxation and passive stiffness of the left ventricle. N Engl J Med, 2004. 350(19): p. 1953-9.

3. Miller, C.E., et al., Pressure overload alters stress-strain properties of the developing chick heart. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 2003. 285(5): p. H1849-56.

4. Hoskins, A.C., et al., Normal passive viscoelasticity but abnormal myofibrillar force generation in human hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Mol Cell Cardiol, 2010. 49(5): p. 737-745.

5. Damughatla, A.R., et al., Quantification of Aortic Stiffness Using MR Elastography and its Comparison to MRI-Based Pulse Wave Velocity. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2015. 41(1): p. 44-51.

6. Holmes, J.W., et al., Structure and mechanics of healing myocardial infarcts. Annu Rev Biomed Eng, 2005. 7: p. 223-53.

7. Burkhoff, D., et al., Assessment of systolic and diastolic ventricular properties via pressure-volume analysis: a guide for clinical, translational, and basic researchers. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 2005. 289(2): p. H501-12.

8. Slordahl, S.A., et al., Segmental aortic wall stiffness from intravascular ultrasound at normal and subnormal aortic pressure in pigs. Acta Physiol Scand, 1991. 143(3): p. 227-32.

9. Alecu, C., et al., Pre-existing arterial stiffness can predict hypotension during induction of anaesthesia in the elderly. Br J Anaesth, 2010. 105(5): p. 583-588.

10. Vappou, J., et al., Pulse wave imaging for noninvasive and quantitative measurement of arterial stiffness in vivo. Am J Hypertens, 2010. 23(4): p. 393-8.

11. Fielden, S.W., et al., A new method for the determination of aortic pulse wave velocity using cross-correlation on 2D PCMR velocity data. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2008. 27(6): p. 1382-7.

12. DeLoach, S.S. and R.R. Townsend, Vascular stiffness: its measurement and significance for epidemiologic and outcome studies. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 2008. 3(1): p. 184-92.

13. Zhang, X., et al., Noninvasive method for estimation of complex elastic modulus of arterial vessels. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control, 2005. 52(4): p. 642-52.

14. Luo, J., et al., Pulse wave imaging of normal and aneurysmal abdominal aortas in vivo. IEEE Trans Med Imaging, 2009. 28(4): p. 477-86.

15. Wassenaar, P.A., et al., Measuring age-dependent myocardial stiffness across the cardiac cycle using MR elastography: A reproducibility study. Magn Reson Med, 2016. 75(4): p. 1586-1593.

Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 25 (2017)