Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2025
Biventricular Assessment of Cardiac Function and Pressure-Volume Loops by Closed-Chest Catheterization in Mice
Published on: June 15, 2020
Dynamic pressure-volume loop analysis by simultaneous real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance and left heart
Felicia Seemann1, Christopher G Bruce2, Jaffar M Khan2
1Cardiovascular Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Heart, Lung, and Blood, Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10 Rm B1D47, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. felicia.seemann@nih.gov.
Background:
Left ventricular (LV) contractility and compliance are derived from pressure-volume (PV) loops during dynamic preload reduction, but reliable simultaneous measurements of pressure and volume are challenging with current technologies. We have developed a method to quantify contractility and compliance from PV loops during a dynamic preload reduction using simultaneous measurements of volume from real-time cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and invasive LV pressures with CMR-specific signal conditioning.
Methods:
Dynamic PV loops were derived in 16 swine (n = 7 naïve, n = 6 with aortic banding to increase afterload, n = 3 with ischemic cardiomyopathy) while occluding the inferior vena cava (IVC). Occlusion was performed simultaneously with the acquisition of dynamic LV volume from long-axis real-time CMR at 0.55 T, and recordings of invasive LV and aortic pressures, electrocardiogram, and CMR gradient waveforms. PV loops were derived by synchronizing pressure and volume measurements. Linear regression of end-systolic- and end-diastolic- pressure-volume relationships enabled calculation of contractility. PV loops measurements in the CMR environment were compared to conductance PV loop catheter measurements in 5 animals. Long-axis 2D LV volumes were validated with short-axis-stack images.
Results:
Simultaneous PV acquisition during IVC-occlusion was feasible. The cardiomyopathy model measured lower contractility (0.2 ± 0.1 mmHg/ml vs 0.6 ± 0.2 mmHg/ml) and increased compliance (12.0 ± 2.1 ml/mmHg vs 4.9 ± 1.1 ml/mmHg) compared to naïve animals. The pressure gradient across the aortic band was not clinically significant (10 ± 6 mmHg). Correspondingly, no differences were found between the naïve and banded pigs. Long-axis and short-axis LV volumes agreed well (difference 8.2 ± 14.5 ml at end-diastole, -2.8 ± 6.5 ml at end-systole). Agreement in contractility and compliance derived from conductance PV loop catheters and in the CMR environment was modest (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.56 and 0.44, respectively).
Conclusions:
Dynamic PV loops during a real-time CMR-guided preload reduction can be used to derive quantitative metrics of contractility and compliance, and provided more reliable volumetric measurements than conductance PV loop catheters.
