Differences in native T1 and native T2 mapping between patients on hemodialysis and control subjects

• Published in: European journal of radiology Vol. 140; p. 109748
• Main Authors: Graham-Brown, Matthew P.M., Gulsin, Gaurav S., Poli, Federica, Parke, Kelly, Burton, James O., McCann, Gerry P.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Ireland Elsevier B.V 01.07.2021
• Subjects: Hemodialysis; Myocardial edema; Native T1 mapping; Native T2 mapping; mm; T2DM; LVMi; MOLLI; Hemodialysis; ms; ESKD; CMR; LV; MOCO; SSFP; STIR; ANCOVA; Native T2 mapping; Native T1 mapping; ANOVA; NHS; LVEDV; Myocardial edema; CKD
• ISSN: 0720-048X; 1872-7727; 1872-7727
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109748

•The elevated T1 times commonly observed in patients with ESKD are not accompanied by increases in native T2.•For patients with ESKD elevated T1 times are likely to represent diffuse insterstital fibrosis, not myocardial edema.•Native T1 and native T2 are highly reproducible and are attractive markers for assessment of myocardial disease in ESKD. Myocardial native T1 is a potential measure of myocardial fibrosis, but concerns remain over the potential influence of myocardial edema to increased native T1 signal in subjects prone to fluid overload. This study describes differences in native T2 (typically raised in states of myocardial edema) and native T1 times in patients on hemodialysis by comparing native T1 and native T2 times between subjects on hemodialysis to an asymptomatic control group. Reproducibility of these sequences was tested. Subjects were recruited prospectively and underwent 3 T-cardiac MRI with acquisition of native T1 and native T2 maps. Between group differences in native T1 and T2 maps were assessed using one-way ANOVAs. 30 subjects underwent test-retest scans within a week of their original scan to define sequence reproducibility. 261 subjects completed the study (hemodialysis n = 124, control n = 137). Native T1 times were significantly increased in subjects on hemodialysis compared to control subjects (1259 ms ± 51 vs 1212 ms ± 37, p < 0.01). There was no difference in native T2 times between subjects on hemodialysis and control subjects (39.5 ms ± 2.5 vs 39.5 ms ± 2.3, p = 0.9). These differences were unchanged after adjustment for relevant baseline differences (age, sex and hemoglobin). Inter-study reproducibility for native T1 and T2 mapping was excellent (coefficient of variability 0.9 % and 2.6 % respectively). The increased native T1 signal demonstrated in subjects on hemodialysis occurs independently of differences in native T2 and the two parameters are not orthogonal. Elevated native T1 in patients on hemodialysis may be driven by water related to myocardial fibrosis rather than edema from volume overload.