Interdependence between myocardial deformation and perfusion in patients with T2DM and HFpEF: a feature-tracking and stress perfusion CMR study.

Abstract

Background: Patients with diabetes have an increased risk of developing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study aimed to compare indices of myocardial deformation and perfusion between patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with and without HFpEF and to investigate the relationship between myocardial strain and perfusion reserve.

Methods: This study included 156 patients with T2DM without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and 50 healthy volunteers who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) examination at our center. Patients with T2DM were subdivided into the T2DM-HFpEF (n = 74) and the T2DM-non-HFpEF (n = 82) groups. The parameters of left ventricular (LV) and left atrial (LA) strain as well as stress myocardial perfusion were compared. The correlation between myocardial deformation and perfusion parameters was also assessed. Mediation analyses were used to evaluate the direct and indirect effects of T2DM on LA strain.

Results: Patients with T2DM and HFpEF had reduced LV radial peak systolic strain rate (PSSR), LV circumferential peak diastolic strain rate (PDSR), LA reservoir strain, global myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI), and increased LA booster strain compared to patients with T2DM without HFpEF (all P < 0.05). Furthermore, LV longitudinal PSSR, LA reservoir, and LA conduit strain were notably impaired in patients with T2DM without HFpEF compared to controls (all P < 0.05), but LV torsion, LV radial PSSR, and LA booster strain compensated for these alterations (all P < 0.05). Multivariate linear regression analysis demonstrated that LA reservoir and LA booster strain were independently associated with global MPRI (β = 0.259, P < 0.001; β =  - 0.326, P < 0.001, respectively). Further, the difference in LA reservoir and LA booster strain between patients with T2DM with and without HFpEF was totally mediated by global MPRI. Global stress PI, LA booster, global rest PI, and global MPRI showed high accuracy in diagnosing HFpEF among patients with T2DM (areas under the curve [AUC]: 0.803, 0.790, 0.740, 0.740, respectively).

Conclusions: Patients with T2DM and HFpEF exhibited significant LV systolic and diastolic deformation, decreased LA reservoir strain, severe impairment of myocardial perfusion, and elevated LA booster strain that is a compensatory response in HFpEF. Global MPRI was identified as an independent influencing factor on LA reservoir and LA booster strain. The difference in LA reservoir and LA booster strain between patients with T2DM with and without HFpEF was totally mediated by global MPRI, suggesting a possible mechanistic link between microcirculation impairment and cardiac dysfunction in diabetes. Myocardial perfusion and LA strain may prove valuable for diagnosing and managing HFpEF in the future.