Advertisement

The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging

, Volume 32, Issue 11, pp 1625–1633 | Cite as

Prognostic value of T1-mapping in TAVR patients: extra-cellular volume as a possible predictor for peri- and post-TAVR adverse events

  • Jonathan Nadjiri
  • Hanna Nieberler
  • Eva Hendrich
  • Albrecht Will
  • Costanza Pellegrini
  • Oliver Husser
  • Christian Hengstenberg
  • Andreas Greiser
  • Stefan Martinoff
  • Martin Hadamitzky
Original Paper

Abstract

The benefit of a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can differ in patients, and therapy bears severe risks. High-degree aortic stenosis can lead to cardiac damage such as diffuse myocardial fibrosis, evaluable by extra-cellular volume (ECV) in CMR. Therefore, fibrosis might be a possible risk factor for unfavorable outcome after TAVR. We sought to assess the prognostic value of T1-mapping and ECV to predict adverse events during and after TAVR. The study population consisted of patients undergoing clinically indicated TAVR by performing additional CMR with native and contrast-enhanced T1-mapping sequences for additional evaluation of ECV. Study endpoints were congestive heart failure (CHF) and TAVR-associated conduction abnormalities defined as new onset of left bundle branch block (LBBB), AV-Block or implantation of a pacemaker. 94 patients were examined and followed. Median follow up time was 187 days (IQR 79–357 days). ECV was increased (>30 %) in 38 patients (40 %). There was no significant correlation between ECV and death, Hazard ratio (HR) 0.847 (95 % CI 0.335; 2.14), p = 0.72. ECV in patients with subsequent CHF was higher than in those without an event (33.5 ± 4.6 and 29.1 ± 4.1 %, respectively), but the difference just did not reach the level of significance HR 2.16 (95 % CI 0.969; 4.84), p = 0.06. Patients with post-TAVR conduction abnormality (LBBB, AV-block or pacemaker implantation) had statistically relevant lower ECV values compared to those without an event. Patients with an event had a mean ECV of 28.1 ± 3.16 %; patients without an event had a mean ECV of 29.8 ± 4.53, HR 0.56 (95 % CI 0.32; 0.96), p = 0.036. In this study, elevated myocardial ECV is a predictor of CHF by trend; CMR may be helpful in identifying patients with a high risk for post-TAVR cardiac decompensation benefitting from an intensified post-interventional surveillance. Patients with post-TAVR conductions abnormalities have a significantly decreased ECV. Nevertheless, it remains unclear which precise molecular tissue alteration is the protective factor or risk factor in this case.

Keywords

T1-mapping Extra cellular volume Predictive value Outcome after TAVR Conduction abnormalities 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Andreas Greiser is a full-time employee of Siemens Healthcare GmbH. The other authors have nothing to disclose. This is an investigator-driven study; there is no involvement from outside the departments.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study design was approved by the local ethics committee.

Informed consent

All patients gave written informed consent before examination.

References

  1. 1.
    ROSS J, Braunwald E (1968) Aortic stenosis. Circulation 38(1S5):V61–V67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheitlin MD, Gertz EW, Brundage BH, Carlson CJ, Quash JA, Bode RS (1979) Rate of progression of severity of valvular aortic stenosis in the adult. Am Heart J 98(6):689–700CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Otto CM, Pearlman AS, Gardner CL (1989) Hemodynamic progression of aortic stenosis in adults assessed by Doppler echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 13(3):545–550CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davies S, Gershlick A, Balcon R (1991) Progression of valvar aortic stenosis: a long-term retrospective study. Eur Heart J 12(1):10–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC, Faxon DP, Freed MD, Gaasch WH, Lytle BW, Nishimura RA, O’Gara PT (2008) 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease) Endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 52(13):e1–e142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cao C, Ang SC, Indraratna P, Manganas C, Bannon P, Black D, Tian D, Yan TD (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2(1):10–23. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2012.11.09 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Masson J-B, Kovac J, Schuler G, Ye J, Cheung A, Kapadia S, Tuzcu ME, Kodali S, Leon MB, Webb JG (2009) Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: review of the nature, management, and avoidance of procedural complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2(9):811–820CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Urena M, Webb JG, Eltchaninoff H, Munoz-Garcia AJ, Bouleti C, Tamburino C, Nombela-Franco L, Nietlispach F, Moris C, Ruel M, Dager AE, Serra V, Cheema AN, Amat-Santos IJ, de Brito FS, Lemos PA, Abizaid A, Sarmento-Leite R, Ribeiro HB, Dumont E, Barbanti M, Durand E, Alonso Briales JH, Himbert D, Vahanian A, Imme S, Garcia E, Maisano F, del Valle R, Benitez LM, Garcia del Blanco B, Gutierrez H, Perin MA, Siqueira D, Bernardi G, Philippon F, Rodes-Cabau J (2015) Late cardiac death in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: incidence and predictors of advanced heart failure and sudden cardiac death. J Am Coll Cardiol 65(5):437–448. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.11.027 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koos R, Horst Mahnken A, Aktug Ö, Dohmen G, Autschbach R, Marx N, Hoffmann R (2011) Electrocardiographic and imaging predictors for permanent pacemaker requirement after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Heart Valve Dis 20(1):83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Houthuizen P, Van Garsse LA, Poels TT, de Jaegere P, van der Boon RM, Swinkels BM, Jurriën M, van der Kley F, Schalij MJ, Baan J (2012) Left bundle branch block induced by transcatheter aortic valve implantation increases risk of death. Circulation. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.101055 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schoeller R, Andresen D, Büttner P, Oezcelik K, Vey G, Schröder R (1993) First-or second-degree atrioventricular block as a risk factor in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 71(8):720–726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cheng S, Keyes MJ, Larson MG, McCabe EL, Newton-Cheh C, Levy D, Benjamin EJ, Vasan RS, Wang TJ (2009) Long-term outcomes in individuals with prolonged PR interval or first-degree atrioventricular block. JAMA 301(24):2571–2577CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boxerman JL, Mosher TJ, McVeigh ER, Atalar E, Lima JA, DA. B (1998) Advanced MR imaging techniques for evaluation of the heart and great vessels. Radiographics 18(3):543–564CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Poon M, Fuster V, Fayad Z (2002) Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a “one-stop-shop” evaluation of myocardial dysfunction. Curr Opin Cardiol 17(6):663–670CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ugander M, Oki AJ, Hsu LY, Kellman P, Greiser A, Aletras AH, Sibley CT, Chen MY, Bandettini WP, Arai AE (2012) Extracellular volume imaging by magnetic resonance imaging provides insights into overt and sub-clinical myocardial pathology. Eur Heart J 33(10):1268–1278. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr481 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hadamitzky M, Langhans B, Hausleiter J, Sonne C, Byrne RA, Mehilli J, Kastrati A, Schomig A, Martinoff S, Ibrahim T (2013) Prognostic value of late gadolinium enhancement in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction in comparison with single-photon emission tomography using Tc99m-Sestamibi. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jet176 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kellman P, Arai AE, Xue H (2013) T1 and extracellular volume mapping in the heart: estimation of error maps and the influence of noise on precision. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 15:56. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-56 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ugander M, Bagi PS, Oki AJ, Chen B, Hsu LY, Aletras AH, Shah S, Greiser A, Kellman P, Arai AE (2012) Myocardial edema as detected by pre-contrast T1 and T2 CMR delineates area at risk associated with acute myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 5(6):596–603. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.01.016 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A, Tiberti N, Lisacek F, Sanchez J-C, Müller M (2011) pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 12(1):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    TEAM R Core (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computingGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mahmod M, Piechnik SK, Levelt E, Ferreira VM, Francis JM, Lewis A, Pal N, Dass S, Ashrafian H, Neubauer S, Karamitsos TD (2014) Adenosine stress native T1 mapping in severe aortic stenosis: evidence for a role of the intravascular compartment on myocardial T1 values. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 16:92. doi: 10.1186/s12968-014-0092-y CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bleiziffer S, Ruge H, Hörer J, Hutter A, Geisbüsch S, Brockmann G, Mazzitelli D, Bauernschmitt R, Lange R (2010) Predictors for new-onset complete heart block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3(5):524–530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moon JC, Messroghli DR, Kellman P, Piechnik SK, Robson MD, Ugander M, Gatehouse PD, Arai AE, Friedrich MG, Neubauer S, Schulz-Menger J, Schelbert EB (2013) Myocardial T1 mapping and extracellular volume quantification: a Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) and CMR Working Group of the European Society of Cardiology consensus statement. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 15:92. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-921532-429X-15-92 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marcus ML, Doty DB, Hiratzka LF, Wright CB, Eastham CL (1982) Decreased coronary reserve: a mechanism for angina pectoris in patients with aortic stenosis and normal coronary arteries. N Engl J Med 307(22):1362–1366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Follath F, Ginks W (1972) Changes in the QRS complex after aortic valve replacement. Br Heart J 34(6):553CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dawkins S, Hobson AR, Kalra PR, Tang AT, Monro JL, Dawkins KD (2008) Permanent pacemaker implantation after isolated aortic valve replacement: incidence, indications, and predictors. Ann Thorac Surg 85(1):108–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Nadjiri
    • 1
  • Hanna Nieberler
    • 1
  • Eva Hendrich
    • 1
  • Albrecht Will
    • 1
  • Costanza Pellegrini
    • 2
  • Oliver Husser
    • 2
  • Christian Hengstenberg
    • 2
  • Andreas Greiser
    • 3
  • Stefan Martinoff
    • 1
  • Martin Hadamitzky
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Deutsches Herzzentrum MünchenTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
  2. 2.Department of Cardiology, Deutsches Herzzentrum MünchenTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
  3. 3.Siemens Healthcare GmbHErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations