Post-cardiac arrest temporal evolution of left ventricular function in a rat model. Speckle tracking Echocardiography and cardiac circulating biomarkers

D. De Giorgio, D. Olivari, F. Fumagalli, D. Novelli, María Cerrato, Francesca Motta, G. Ristagno, Roberto Latini, L. Staszewsky
{"title":"Post-cardiac arrest temporal evolution of left ventricular function in a rat model. Speckle tracking Echocardiography and cardiac circulating biomarkers","authors":"D. De Giorgio, D. Olivari, F. Fumagalli, D. Novelli, María Cerrato, Francesca Motta, G. Ristagno, Roberto Latini, L. Staszewsky","doi":"10.1093/ehjimp/qyae006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n There is little information from experimental studies regarding the evolution of post-resuscitation cardiac arrest (post-ROSC) myocardial dysfunction during mid-term follow-up. For this purpose, we assessed left ventricular (LV) function and circulating cardiac biomarkers at different time points in a rat model of cardiac arrest (CA).\n \n \n \n Rats were divided into two groups: control and post-ROSC rats. Eight min of untreated ventricular fibrillation were followed by 8 min of CPR. Conventional and speckle tracking (STE) echocardiographic parameters and cardiac circulating biomarkers concentrations were assessed, at 3-4-72-96h post-ROSC.\n \n \n \n At 3-and-4h post-ROSC LV systolic function resulted severely impaired and hs-cTnT and NT-pro ANP plasma concentrations were significantly increased, compared to control rats (p<0.0001 for all). At 72 and 96h post-ROSC left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) normalized. At 96h, the following variables were significantly different from control rats: early-trans-mitral-peak-velocity, 56.8 ± 3.1 vs. 87.8 ± 3.8 cm/sec, p<0.0001; late-trans-mitral-peak-velocity, 50.6±4.7 vs. 73.7±4.2 cm/sec, p<0.0001; mean s’ wave velocity, 4.6±0.3 vs. 5.9±0.3 cm/sec, p<0.0001, global longitudinal strain (GLS) -7.5±0.5 and vs. -11±1.2%, p<0.01, global longitudinal strain rate (GLSR): -0-9±0.4 and -2.3±0.2 1/sec, p<0.01 and NT-proANP concentration, 2.5[0.2; 6.0] vs 0.4 [0.01; 1.0] nmol/L, p<0.01.\n \n \n \n s’ velocity, GLS and GLSR, indicated that LV systolic function was still impaired 96h post-ROSC. These findings agree with NT-proANP concentrations which continue high. Normalization of LVEF supports the use of STE for its greater sensitivity for monitoring post-CA cardiac function. Further investigations are needed to provide evidence of the post-ROSC LV diastolic function pattern.\n","PeriodicalId":508944,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and Practice","volume":"54 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyae006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is little information from experimental studies regarding the evolution of post-resuscitation cardiac arrest (post-ROSC) myocardial dysfunction during mid-term follow-up. For this purpose, we assessed left ventricular (LV) function and circulating cardiac biomarkers at different time points in a rat model of cardiac arrest (CA). Rats were divided into two groups: control and post-ROSC rats. Eight min of untreated ventricular fibrillation were followed by 8 min of CPR. Conventional and speckle tracking (STE) echocardiographic parameters and cardiac circulating biomarkers concentrations were assessed, at 3-4-72-96h post-ROSC. At 3-and-4h post-ROSC LV systolic function resulted severely impaired and hs-cTnT and NT-pro ANP plasma concentrations were significantly increased, compared to control rats (p<0.0001 for all). At 72 and 96h post-ROSC left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) normalized. At 96h, the following variables were significantly different from control rats: early-trans-mitral-peak-velocity, 56.8 ± 3.1 vs. 87.8 ± 3.8 cm/sec, p<0.0001; late-trans-mitral-peak-velocity, 50.6±4.7 vs. 73.7±4.2 cm/sec, p<0.0001; mean s’ wave velocity, 4.6±0.3 vs. 5.9±0.3 cm/sec, p<0.0001, global longitudinal strain (GLS) -7.5±0.5 and vs. -11±1.2%, p<0.01, global longitudinal strain rate (GLSR): -0-9±0.4 and -2.3±0.2 1/sec, p<0.01 and NT-proANP concentration, 2.5[0.2; 6.0] vs 0.4 [0.01; 1.0] nmol/L, p<0.01. s’ velocity, GLS and GLSR, indicated that LV systolic function was still impaired 96h post-ROSC. These findings agree with NT-proANP concentrations which continue high. Normalization of LVEF supports the use of STE for its greater sensitivity for monitoring post-CA cardiac function. Further investigations are needed to provide evidence of the post-ROSC LV diastolic function pattern.
大鼠模型中心脏骤停后左心室功能的时间演变。斑点追踪超声心动图和心脏循环生物标记物
关于心脏骤停复苏(ROSC)后心肌功能障碍在中期随访期间的演变情况,实验研究中几乎没有相关信息。为此,我们在心脏骤停(CA)大鼠模型中评估了不同时间点的左心室(LV)功能和循环心脏生物标志物。 大鼠分为两组:对照组和 ROSC 后组。未经处理的心室颤动 8 分钟后进行心肺复苏 8 分钟。在 ROSC 后 3-4-72-96 小时评估常规和斑点追踪(STE)超声心动图参数和心脏循环生物标志物浓度。 与对照组大鼠相比,ROSC 术后 3-4 小时左心室收缩功能严重受损,hs-cTnT 和 NT-pro ANP 血浆浓度显著升高(均 p<0.0001)。ROSC后72小时和96小时,左心室射血分数(LVEF)恢复正常。在 96 小时时,以下变量与对照组大鼠有显著差异:早期-跨窦-峰值-速度,56.8 ± 3.1 vs. 87.8 ± 3.8 厘米/秒,p<0.0001;晚期-跨窦-峰值-速度,50.6±4.7 vs. 73.7±4.2 厘米/秒,p<0.0001;平均 s'波速度,4.6±0.3 vs. 5.9±0.3 厘米/秒,p<0.0001,全局纵向应变(GLS)-7.5±0.5 和 vs. -11±1.2%,p<0.01,全局纵向应变率(GLSR):-0-9±0.4 和 -2.3±0.2 1/秒,p<0.S'速度、GLS和GLSR表明,ROSC术后96小时左心室收缩功能仍然受损。这些发现与NT-proANP浓度持续偏高一致。LVEF 的正常化支持 STE 的使用,因为 STE 在监测 CA 后心脏功能方面具有更高的灵敏度。还需要进一步的研究来证明 ROSC 后左心室舒张功能的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信