Ethnic differences in cardiac structure and function assessed by MRI in healthy South Asian and White European people: A UK Biobank Study.

BACKGROUND: Echocardiographic studies indicate South Asian people have smaller ventricular volumes, lower mass and more concentric remodelling than White European people, but there are no data using cardiac MRI (CMR). We aimed to compare CMR quantified cardiac structure and function in White European and South Asian people. METHODS: Healthy White European and South Asian participants in the UK Biobank Imaging CMR sub-study were identified by excluding those with a history of cardiovascular disease, hypertension, obesity or diabetes. Ethnic groups were matched by age and sex. Cardiac volumes, mass and feature tracking strain were compared. RESULTS: 121 matched pairs (77 male/44 female, mean age 58 ± 8 years) of South Asian and White European participants were included. South Asian males and females had smaller absolute but not indexed left ventricular (LV) volumes, and smaller absolute and indexed right ventricular volumes, with lower absolute and indexed LV mass and lower LV mass:volume than White European participants. Although there were no differences in ventricular or atrial ejection fractions, LV global longitudinal strain was higher in South Asian females than White European females but not males, and global circumferential strain was higher in both male and South Asian females than White European females. Peak early diastolic strain rates were higher in South Asian versus White European males, but not different between South Asian and White European females. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to echocardiographic studies, South Asian participants in the UK Biobank study had less concentric remodelling and higher global circumferential strain than White European subjects. These findings emphasise the importance of sex- and ethnic- specific normal ranges for cardiac volumes and function.

Is atrial fibrillation in HFpEF a distinct phenotype? Insights from multiparametric MRI and circulating biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently co-exist. There is a limited understanding on whether this coexistence is associated with distinct alterations in myocardial remodelling and mechanics. We aimed to determine if patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represent a distinct phenotype. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of adults with HFpEF (NCT03050593), participants were comprehensively phenotyped with stress cardiac MRI, echocardiography and plasma fibroinflammatory biomarkers, and were followed for the composite endpoint (HF hospitalisation or death) at a median of 8.5 years. Those with AF were compared to sinus rhythm (SR) and unsupervised cluster analysis was performed to explore possible phenotypes. RESULTS: 136 subjects were included (SR = 75, AF = 61). The AF group was older (76 ± 8 vs. 70 ± 10 years) with less diabetes (36% vs. 61%) compared to the SR group and had higher left atrial (LA) volumes (61 ± 30 vs. 39 ± 15 mL/m2, p < 0.001), lower LA ejection fraction (EF) (31 ± 15 vs. 51 ± 12%, p < 0.001), worse left ventricular (LV) systolic function (LVEF 63 ± 8 vs. 68 ± 8%, p = 0.002; global longitudinal strain 13.6 ± 2.9 vs. 14.7 ± 2.4%, p = 0.003) but higher LV peak early diastolic strain rates (0.73 ± 0.28 vs. 0.53 ± 0.17 1/s, p < 0.001). The AF group had higher levels of syndecan-1, matrix metalloproteinase-2, proBNP, angiopoietin-2 and pentraxin-3, but lower level of interleukin-8. No difference in clinical outcomes was observed between the groups. Three distinct clusters were identified with the poorest outcomes (Log-rank p = 0.029) in cluster 2 (hypertensive and fibroinflammatory) which had equal representation of SR and AF. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of AF in HFpEF is associated with cardiac structural and functional changes together with altered expression of several fibro-inflammatory biomarkers. Distinct phenotypes exist in HFpEF which may have differing clinical outcomes.