Abstract:Background: Patients with different types of heart failure (HF) exhibit varying rates of blood flow through cardiac chambers and pressure gradients across the aortic valve, attributed to differing degrees of myocardial contractility. Assessment of these dynamics offers insights into early HF diagnosis. This study aimed to analyze left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) blood flow parameters, specifically peak blood flow velocity and pressure gradient derived from four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR), and to evaluate 4D flow CMR's utility in distinguishing HF types. Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study recruited 115 HF patients from January 2019 to May 2022 at the General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, classified by the New York Heart Association Cardiac Function Classification of Heart Failure as class II-IV, alongside a control group (n=30). Participants underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), including 4D flow. HF patients were categorized into heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF, n=55), heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF, n=30), and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF, n=30), based on ejection fraction. The cardiac functional parameters and aortic valve flow indices were measured using Circle Cardiovascular Imaging. LVOT 4D flow data were obtained 3 mm below the junction of the aortic valve leaflets, assessing peak velocities above and below the valve. Differences in cardiac function and blood flow parameters between groups were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The accuracy of these parameters in identifying subgroups was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results: Analysis of conventional cardiac function parameters revealed that left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly lower in the HFrEF and HFmrEF groups compared to the HFpEF and control groups (P<0.01). Additionally, end-diastolic volume and end-systolic volume were significantly higher in the HFrEF and HFmrEF groups than in the HFpEF and control groups (P<0.01). However, there were no significant differences in cardiac function parameters between the HFpEF and control groups (P>0.05). Significant differences were observed in aortic valve peak pressure gradients (Supra-APGmax) among the four study groups (5.01±1.09 vs. 6.23±2.94 vs. 7.63±1.81 vs. 8.89±2.97 mmHg, P<0.05). Aortic valve peak velocities in the HFrEF group differed significantly from the HFpEF and control groups (111.31±12.05 cm/s vs. 137.2±16 vs. 147.15±24.55 cm/s, P<0.001). The ROC curve for the pressure gradient below the aortic valve had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.728 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.591-0.864, P=0.002], with an optimal threshold of 4.72 mmHg (sensitivity: 0.8, specificity: 0.7, Youden index: 0.5). Conclusions: HF patients exhibit reduced pressure gradients across the aortic valve during systole, indicative of altered intracardiac blood flow dynamics. Combining aortic valve velocities and pressure gradients can aid in distinguishing different types of HF, including HFpEF patients.

4D Flow Component Reveals Left Ventricular Function in Atrial Fibrillation

Assessment of Left Atrial Appendage Morphology and Function in Patients with Non-valvular Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation with Different Rhythms Using Real-Time 3D Transesophageal Echocardiography.

The assessment of left atrial and left atrial appendage mechanics in patients with different stages of atrial fibrillation

Comparison of Left Atrial and Left Atrial Appendage Mechanics in the Risk Stratification of Stroke in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Altered left atrial 4D flow characteristics in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in the absence of apparent remodeling

Evaluation of left ventricular and left atrial volumetric function from native MR multislice 4D flow magnitude data

Comprehensive assessment of left atrial and ventricular remodeling in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation by the cardiovascular magnetic resonance myocardial extracellular volume fraction and feature tracking strain

Changes of Left Atrial Morphology and Function Evaluated with Four-Dimensional Automated Left Atrial Quantification Echocardiography in Patients with Coronary Slow Flow Phenomenon and Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.

Robust and fast stochastic 4D flow vector-field signature technique for quantifying composite flow dynamics from 4D flow MRI: Application to left atrial flow in atrial fibrillation

Evaluation of Left Atrial Volume and Function in Patients with Coronary Slow Flow Phenomenon Using Real-Time Three-Dimensional Echocardiography

Comparison of Four‐Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis of Left Ventricular Fluid Dynamics and Energetics in Ischemic and Restrictive Cardiomyopathies

4D‐Flow MRI intracardiac flow analysis considering different subtypes of pulmonary hypertension

Hemodynamic forces using four-dimensional flow MRI: an independent biomarker of cardiac function in heart failure with left ventricular dyssynchrony?

The value of blood flow velocity and pressure gradient in differentiating patients with different types of heart failure

Left Atrium Hemodynamic in Atrial Fibrillation and Normal Subjects

Novel insights into diminished cardiac reserve in non-obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy from four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance component analysis

Impact of 4D-Flow CMR Parameters on Functional Evaluation of Fontan Circulation

Abstract 15625: Left Atrial Appendage Volumetric and Functional Assessment Using Cardiac CT-Derived Three-Dimensional Models

Correlation between left atrial appendage morphology based on fractal dimension quantification and its hemodynamic parameters in patients with atrial fibrillation

4D flow MRI and T1 -Mapping: Assessment of altered cardiac hemodynamics and extracellular volume fraction in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Clinical relevance of aortic conduit and reservoir function