Table 4 Value of FT-CMR in different Adult Congenital Heart Diseases
FT-CMR Value | Reference | Condition | Study design | Level of evidencea | N. of patients | Age (years)b | Primary endpointsc | Follow up (years) | Results & Conclusions in brief |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prediction of arrhythmia, SCD and mortality | Orwat et al. [26] | Repaired TOF | N.R. cohort | 3 | 372 | Median 16, range (12–20) | Death, aborted SCD and NSVT. | 7.4 | LV GCS ≤ −20 and RV GLS ≤ − 12 were independent predictors of the primary endpoint irrespective of NYHA functional class, peak O2 uptake & EF. |
Correlation with reduction in exercise capacity. | Schmidt et al. [8] | Fontan patients | C.S | 3 | 13 | 27 ± 7 | Δ in SV systolic function, and CPEX. | NA | SV GLS & GCS were correlated with the age at the time of Fontan (r = − 0.76, P = 0.02 for GCS), NYHA class and peak oxygen uptake on CPEX (r = 0.71, P = .046 for GLS); |
Kempny et al. [27] | Repaired TOF | C.S | 3 | 28 | 40.4 ± 13.3 | Δ RV & LV strain and their correlation with CPEX. | NA | 1) Impaired LV & RV GLS (− 19.2 ± 4.0 vs. -21.3 ± 3.3%, P = 0.048 and − 18.3 ± 4.3 vs. -24.1 ± 4.0%, P < 0.001 respectively). 2) RV GRS correlated with Peak VO2 (r = 0.49, P = 0.02), while RV GCS and GRS correlated significantly with VE/VCO2 slope (r = − 0.54, P = 0.01 and r = − 0.56, P = 0.008). | |
Tutarel et al. [28] | TGA after atrial repair | Case-control | 4 | 91 | 30.1 ± 5.1 | Δ sRV and LV functions & correlation between strain and CPEX. | NA | 1) sRV EF was correlated with sRV GCS and sRV GRS (r = 0.56, p < 0.001) and (r = 0.32, p = 0.007) respectively. 2) QRS duration was negatively correlated with sRV GCS. 3) LV GLS was correlated with peak VO2 (r = − 0.4, p < 0.001). | |
Detection of impaired ventricular function. | Liu et al. [30] | Ebstein’s Anomaly | C.S | 3 | 32 | 31.9 ± 13.1 | Δ in LV strain. | NA | LV strain parameters were significantly lower compared with controls (P < 0.05). |
Shang et al. [42] | Repaired coarctation | Case-control | 4 | 75 | 19.7 ± 6.7 | Δ in LV GLS & LA GLS. | NA | LV & LA strains were lower in CoA subgroups compared to controls but were not different between normotensive and hypertensive CoA. | |
Padiyath et al. [36] | Repaired TOF | C.S | 3 | 20 | 23.4 ± 7.5 | Δ RV & LV strain. | NA | 1) LV GCS and GRS were reduced in TOF compared to controls (− 21.5 ± 3.6 versus − 24.6 ± 2.5, p = 0.003 and 26.3 ± 9.4 versus 50.9 ± 12.4, p < 0.001 respectively). 2) RVGLS was reduced in patients (− 14.9 ± 4.1 versus controls − 19.9 ± 4.0, P 0.001) | |
Thattaliyath et al. [43] | TGA | Case-control | 4 | AS: 20 ASO: 20 | AS: 28.7 ± 1.8 ASO: 17.7 ± 1.9 | Δ RV & LV strain between AS & ASO groups. | NA | The RV GLS and GCS and strain rates were reduced in the AS group compared with ASO group (− 9.9 ± 0.5 and − 11.2 ± 0.7 versus − 13.2 ± 0.8 and-14.8 ± 0.06, respectively P < 0.05). | |
Latus et al. [44] | Repaired TOF | Case-control | 4 | 54 | 16.4 ± 8.4 | Δ ventricular strain in cases with residual RVOTO. | NA | ▪ Higher RV GCS and GRS in those with residual RVOTO (P = 0.02), ▪ Degree of residual RVOTO post repair was correlated with RV GRS (r = 0.30; P = 0.03) and RV GCS (r = 0.37; P = 0.006). | |
Kutty et al. [32] | Repaired TOF | C.S | 3 | 171 | 18.2 ± 8.4 | Δ in RA GLS & RAEF. | NA | Reduced RA GLS, dilated RAEDV and impaired RAEF. | |
Heiberg et al. [35] | Surgically closed VSD | C.S | 3 | 27 | 20.9 ± 3.1 | LV/ RV EDA & ESA. LVEF and RVFAC. | 20 | RV GRS in the VSD-operated group was higher than that of the controls (30.2 ± 10.4% vs. 22.4 ± 7.7%, P < 0.01). RV GLS showed no difference between both groups. | |
Steinmetz et al. [29] | Ebstein’s Anomaly | NR cohort | 3 | 31 | 31.6 ± 16.9 | NA | LV dyssynchrony more pronounced in patients with a higher NYHA class (circumferential systolic dyssynchrony index, r = 0.529, p = 0.004), BNP value (r = 0.436, p = 0.018) or higher R/L volume index (r = 0.419, p = 0.019). |