- Oral presentation
- Open Access
Non-invasive estimation of increased LV filling pressures in LV hypertrophy with normal systolic function: Comparison between CMR and Doppler, validated by invasive PCWP measurements
© Paelinck et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
- Published: 2 February 2011
- Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
- Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure
- Hypertensive Heart Disease
- Mitral Flow
- Normal Systolic Function
Transmitral flow is unreliable for the estimation of left ventricular (LV) filling pressures in hypertrophy and normal systolic function. Mitral early peak filling velocity E divided by mitral annulus early peak velocity Ea (E/Ea) and global diastolic strain rate (SR) during peak filling provide a relatively load independent measurement of global myocardial performance.
We aimed to compare Doppler and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) assessed E/Ea and non-tagged CMR assessed global diastolic SR for the estimation of filling pressure, in comparison with invasive measurement.
Sixteen patients with hypertensive heart disease (LV mass index: 111 ± 18 g/m2), absence of valvular regurgitation and with normal systolic function (LV ejection fraction: 67 ± 7 %) referred for cardiac catheterization were studied. Measurement of mitral flow and mitral annulus velocities were performed by Doppler and phase-contrast CMR. CMR derived global longitudinal and global volumetric SR during early peak filling was measured using long-axis cine CMR images. These data were validated by catheter based mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP).
Mitral flow E/A had no significant correlation with mean PCWP. E/Ea (Doppler r= 0.74, p<0.01 and CMR r=0.56, p<0.05), longitudinal diastolic SR (r=0.65, p<0.01) and long-axis volumetric diastolic SR (r=0.51, p<0.05) related to invasively measured mean PCWP.
Best prediction of elevated mean PCWP was performed by Doppler assessed E/Ea (sensitivity 75%, specificity: 100%, area under the curve: 0.88, p<0,05). CMR assessed E/Ea, longitudinal volumetric diastolic SR and long-axis volumetric diastolic SR had similar sensitivity (respectively 75%, 87.5 % and 75 %), specificity (respectively 75%, 62.5 % and 87.5 %) and area under the curve (respectively 0.80, 0.80 and 0.80, p<0.05) for the prediction of elevated mean PCWP.
Non-invasive estimation of increased LV filling pressures in LV hypertrophy with normal systolic function can be performed with CMR and Doppler techniques. Doppler assessed E/Ea provided best prediction of elevated LV filling pressure.
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.