Suppr超能文献

心脏磁共振成像与高渗盐水对运动时右心室压力-容积环的容积校准:对心室功能和心室-血管耦合的影响。

Volume calibration with cardiac MRI versus hypertonic saline for right ventricular pressure-volume loops with exercise: Impact on ventricular function and ventricular-vascular coupling.

作者信息

Raza Farhan, Lechuga Chris G, Wieben Oliver, Chesler Naomi C

机构信息

Department of Medicine-Cardiovascular Division, University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin.

Edwards Lifesciences Foundation Cardiovascular Innovation and Research Center (CIRC), Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Irvine, California.

出版信息

J Heart Lung Transplant. 2025 Mar;44(3):331-335. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2024.10.018. Epub 2024 Oct 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Right ventricular (RV) pressure-volume (PV) loops require postacquisition volume calibration by cardiac MRI (CMR) or hypertonic saline (HS). We defined the impact of these 2 volume calibration methods on rest-to-exercise ventricular contractility (end-systolic elastance: Ees), arterial afterload (Ea), and coupling (Ees/Ea).

METHODS

In a prospective study, 82 RV PV-loop datapoints (rest, exercise stages every 25 W, and recovery) and CMR were acquired in 19 participants.

RESULTS

In comparison to CMR, HS-based calibration overestimated RV end-systolic volume at rest, mean (SD) by +38 ml (48) and end-diastolic volume by +46 ml (68), resulting in underestimated right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) by -8%. However, Ees and Ea were similar at rest (r = 0.76 and 0.71, respectively, p < 0.001 for both), and Ees:Ea was identical (r = 1.00, p < 0.001). Exercise metrics also remained similar: RV reserve (ΔEes) and change in coupling (ΔEes/Ea).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to CMR (gold-standard), HS-based calibration underestimates RVEF at rest; however, it is a robust approach for measuring coupling and RV reserve.

摘要

背景

右心室(RV)压力-容积(PV)环需要通过心脏磁共振成像(CMR)或高渗盐水(HS)进行采集后容积校准。我们定义了这两种容积校准方法对静息至运动时心室收缩性(收缩末期弹性:Ees)、动脉后负荷(Ea)和耦联(Ees/Ea)的影响。

方法

在一项前瞻性研究中,对19名参与者采集了82个右心室PV环数据点(静息、每25瓦运动阶段和恢复阶段)以及CMR数据。

结果

与CMR相比,基于HS的校准高估了静息时右心室收缩末期容积,平均(标准差)高估了+38毫升(48),舒张末期容积高估了+46毫升(68),导致右心室射血分数(RVEF)低估了-8%。然而,静息时Ees和Ea相似(分别为r = 0.76和0.71,两者p均<0.001),且Ees:Ea相同(r = 1.00,p < 0.001)。运动指标也保持相似:右心室储备(ΔEes)和耦联变化(ΔEes/Ea)。

结论

与CMR(金标准)相比,基于HS的校准在静息时低估RVEF;然而,它是测量耦联和右心室储备的一种可靠方法。

相似文献

6
Exercise right ventricular ejection fraction predicts right ventricular contractile reserve.运动右心室射血分数预测右心室收缩储备。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2021 Jun;40(6):504-512. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2021.02.005. Epub 2021 Feb 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Right Ventricular Failure.右心室衰竭
N Engl J Med. 2023 Mar 23;388(12):1111-1125. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra2207410.
2
Adaptive versus maladaptive right ventricular remodelling.适应性右心室重构与不良性右心室重构。
ESC Heart Fail. 2023 Apr;10(2):762-775. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14233. Epub 2022 Nov 23.
9
A novel single-beat approach to assess right ventricular systolic function.一种评估右心室收缩功能的新单心动周期方法。
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2018 Feb 1;124(2):283-290. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00258.2017. Epub 2017 Oct 12.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验