Aortic stiffness in aortic stenosis assessed by cardiovascular MRI: a comparison between bicuspid and tricuspid valves.

OBJECTIVES: To compare aortic size and stiffness parameters on MRI between bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients with aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: MRI was performed in 174 patients with asymptomatic moderate-severe AS (mean AVAI 0.57 ± 0.14 cm2/m2) and 23 controls on 3T scanners. Valve morphology was available/analysable in 169 patients: 63 BAV (41 type-I, 22 type-II) and 106 TAV. Aortic cross-sectional areas were measured at the level of the pulmonary artery bifurcation. The ascending and descending aorta (AA, DA) distensibility, and pulse wave velocity (PWV) around the aortic arch were calculated. RESULTS: The AA and DA areas were lower in the controls, with no difference in DA distensibility or PWV, but slightly lower AA distensibility than in the patient group. With increasing age, there was a decrease in distensibility and an increase in PWV. After correcting for age, the AA maximum cross-sectional area was higher in bicuspid vs. tricuspid patients (12.97 [11.10, 15.59] vs. 10.06 [8.57, 12.04] cm2, p < 0.001), but there were no significant differences in AA distensibility (p = 0.099), DA distensibility (p = 0.498) or PWV (p = 0.235). Patients with BAV type-II valves demonstrated a significantly higher AA distensibility and lower PWV compared to type-I, despite a trend towards higher AA area. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with significant AS, BAV patients do not have increased aortic stiffness compared to those with TAV despite increased ascending aortic dimensions. Those with type-II BAV have less aortic stiffness despite greater dimensions. These results demonstrate a dissociation between aortic dilatation and stiffness and suggest that altered flow patterns may play a role. KEY POINTS: • Both cellular abnormalities secondary to genetic differences and abnormal flow patterns have been implicated in the pathophysiology of aortic dilatation and increased vascular complications associated with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV). • We demonstrate an increased ascending aortic size in patients with BAV and moderate to severe AS compared to TAV and controls, but no difference in aortic stiffness parameters, therefore suggesting a dissociation between dilatation and stiffness. • Sub-group analysis showed greater aortic size but lower stiffness parameters in those with BAV type-II AS compared to BAV type-I.

Intertechnique agreement and interstudy reproducibility of strain and diastolic strain rate at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: a comparison of feature-tracking and tagging in patients with aortic stenosis.

PURPOSE: To determine the interstudy reproducibility of myocardial strain and peak early-diastolic strain rate (PEDSR) measurement on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessed with feature tracking (FT) and tagging, in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cardiac MRI was performed twice (1-14 days apart) in 18 patients (8 at 1.5 Tesla [T], 10 at 3T) with moderate-severe AS. Circumferential peak systolic strain (PSS) and PEDSR were measured in all patients. Longitudinal PSS and PEDSR were assessed using FT in all patients, and tagging in the 3T sub-group. RESULTS: PSS was higher with FT than tagging (21.0 ± 1.9% versus 17.0 ± 3.4% at 1.5T, 21.4 ± 4.0% versus 17.7 ± 3.0% at 3T, P < 0.05), as was PEDSR (1.3 ± 0.3 s(-1) versus 1.0 ± 0.3 s(-1) , P = 0.10 at 1.5T and 1.3 ± 0.4 s(-1) versus 0.8 ± 0.3 s(-1) , P < 0.05 at 3T). The reproducibility of PSS was excellent with FT (coefficient of variation [CoV] 9-10%) and good with tagging at 1.5T (13-19%). Reproducibility of circumferential PEDSR was best at 1.5T when only basal/mid slices were included (CoV 12%), but moderate to poor at 3T (29-35%). Reproducibility of longitudinal strain was good with FT (10-16%) but moderate for PEDSR (∼30%). CONCLUSION: In patients with AS, FT consistently produces higher values compared with tagging. The interstudy reproducibility of PSS is excellent with FT and good with tagging. The reproducibility of circumferential PEDSR at 1.5T is good when only basal and mid slices are used.

MicroRNAs in Acute Kidney Injury.

BACKGROUND: It is increasingly recognised that improved diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of acute kidney injury (AKI) requires an understanding of distinct underling cellular and molecular mechanisms (endotypes) that may distinguish overtly similar clinical AKI presentations. One important avenue of research is the post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression in response to kidney injury mediated by microRNAs. SUMMARY: This mini-review summarises the use of microRNAs as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in AKI. The contribution of microRNAs to the pathophysiology of AKI will be highlighted along with the potential for therapeutic applications. Key Messages: While there is great potential for a better understanding of AKI, microRNAs form a complex regulatory network. Understanding the role and significance of microRNAs in the context of AKI and critical illness is a major endeavour in translational medicine, requiring the integration of clinical and experimental data.

Assessment of a Dedicated Transplant Low Clearance Clinic and Patient Outcomes on Dialysis After Renal Allograft Loss at 2 UK Transplant Centers.

BACKGROUND: Low clearance transplant clinics (LCTCs) are recommended for the management of recipients with a failing kidney transplant (RFKT) but data to support their use is limited. We conducted a retrospective study to assess management of RFKT at 2 transplant centers, 1 with a LCTC (center A) and 1 without (center B). METHODS: Patients who transitioned to an alternative form of renal replacement therapy (RRT) between January 1, 2012, and November 30, 2016, were included. Patients with graft failure within a year of transplantation or due to an unpredictable acute event were excluded. Clinical data were collected after review of medical records. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-nine patients (age, 48.6 ± 13.4 years, 99 [55.3%] male, and mean transplant duration 10.3 ± 7.8 years) were included. RRT counseling occurred in 79 (91%) and 68 (74%) patients at centers A and B (P = 0.003), at median 135 (61-319) and 133 (69-260) days before dialysis after graft loss (P = 0.92). Sixty-one (34.1%) patients were waitlisted for retransplantation; 18 (32.7%) nonwaitlisted patients were still undergoing workup at center A compared with 37 (58.7%) at center B (P = 0.028). Preemptive retransplantation occurred in 4 (4.6%) and 5 (5.4%) patients at centers A and B (P = 0.35). At 1 year after initiation of dialysis after graft loss, 11 (15.3%) and 11 (17.2%) patients were retransplanted (P = 0.12), and mortality was 6.6% overall. CONCLUSIONS: A dedicated LCTC improved RRT counseling and transplant work-up but did not lead to improved rates of retransplantation. Earlier consideration of retransplantation in LCTCs is required to improve RFKT outcomes.

Myocardial T1 and extracellular volume fraction measurement in asymptomatic patients with aortic stenosis: reproducibility and comparison with age-matched controls.

AIMS: (i) To establish the test-retest reproducibility of myocardial T1 and extracellular volume (ECV) fraction measurement in asymptomatic patients with moderate-severe aortic stenosis (AS), (ii) to compare reproducibility using motion-corrected (MOCO) parametric T1 maps for analysis vs. full MOLLI series of images, and (iii) to compare T1 and ECV between patients and age-matched controls. METHODS AND RESULTS: 3 T cardiac MRI was performed twice on 10 patients (median interval 7 days) to assess reproducibility. An additional 40 patients and 22 asymptomatic controls underwent a single MRI. Native T1 and ECV were calculated by outlining the myocardium on T1 maps generated inline, and using an offline T1 fit on the MOCO multiple inversion-time raw image series, in the reproducibility cohort (n = 10). Reproducibility was excellent using the inline T1 maps (CoVs for T1: 1.77%; ECV: 6.52%) and good using the full MOLLI series (CoVs for T1: 8.52%; ECV: 12.98%). On comparing AS and controls, who were well matched for age, gender and co-morbidities, there was no significant difference in the native T1 or ECV (T1 = 1103.32 ± 33.07 vs. 1092.27 ± 34.29; ECV = 0.243 ± 0.019 vs. 0.251 ± 0.026 in patients and controls, P > 0.05), which was maintained even after splitting the patients into moderate and severe AS subgroups. CONCLUSION: The test-retest reproducibility of myocardial T1 quantification using MOLLI is excellent in patients with AS and is highest using inline generated T1 maps for analysis. There was no difference in native myocardial T1 or ECV between asymptomatic patients with moderate-severe AS and age-matched controls without valve disease.