ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Left atrial (LA) myopathy is thought to be associated with silent brain infarctions (SBI) through changes in blood flow hemodynamics leading to thrombogenesis. 4D-flow MRI enables in-vivo hemodynamic quantification in the left atrium (LA) and LA appendage (LAA). PURPOSE: To determine whether LA and LAA hemodynamic and volumetric parameters are associated with SBI. STUDY TYPE: Prospective observational study. POPULATION: A single-site cohort of 125 Participants of the multiethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA), mean age: 72.3 ± 7.2 years, 56 men. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5T. Cardiac MRI: Cine balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) and 4D-flow sequences. Brain MRI: T1- and T2-weighted SE and FLAIR. ASSESSMENT: Presence of SBI was determined from brain MRI by neuroradiologists according to routine diagnostic criteria in all participants without a history of stroke based on the MESA database. Minimum and maximum LA volumes and ejection fraction were calculated from bSSFP data. Blood stasis (% of voxels <10 cm/sec) and peak velocity (cm/sec) in the LA and LAA were assessed by a radiologist using an established 4D-flow workflow. STATISTICAL TESTS: Student's t test, Mann-Whitney U test, one-way ANOVA, chi-square test. Multivariable stepwise logistic regression with automatic forward and backward selection. Significance level P < 0.05. RESULTS: 26 (20.8%) had at least one SBI. After Bonferroni correction, participants with SBI were significantly older and had significantly lower peak velocities in the LAA. In multivariable analyses, age (per 10-years) (odds ratio (OR) = 1.99 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30-3.04)) and LAA peak velocity (per cm/sec) (OR = 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81-0.93)) were significantly associated with SBI. CONCLUSION: Older age and lower LAA peak velocity were associated with SBI in multivariable analyses whereas volumetric-based measures from cardiac MRI or cardiovascular risk factors were not. Cardiac 4D-flow MRI showed potential to serve as a novel imaging marker for SBI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
