Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Think Small and Examine the Constituents of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Heart Failure: Cardiomyocytes Versus Fibroblasts, Collagen, and Capillaries in the Interstitium

2015; Wiley; Volume: 4; Issue: 9 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1161/jaha.115.002491

2047-9980

Erik B. Schelbert, Timothy C. Wong, Mihai Gheorghiade,

Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors

HomeJournal of the American Heart AssociationVol. 4, No. 9Think Small and Examine the Constituents of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Heart Failure: Cardiomyocytes Versus Fibroblasts, Collagen, and Capillaries in the Interstitium Open AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toOpen AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBThink Small and Examine the Constituents of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Heart Failure: Cardiomyocytes Versus Fibroblasts, Collagen, and Capillaries in the Interstitium Erik B. Schelbert, MD, MS, Timothy C. Wong, MD, MS and Mihai Gheorghiade, MD Erik B. SchelbertErik B. Schelbert Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA UPMC Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Center, Pittsburgh, PA , Timothy C. WongTimothy C. Wong Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA UPMC Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Center, Pittsburgh, PA and Mihai GheorghiadeMihai Gheorghiade Center for Cardiovascular Innovation, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL Originally published15 Sep 2015https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.002491Journal of the American Heart Association. 2015;4:e002491IntroductionLeft ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and heart failure are prevalent and frequently encountered conditions, but several fundamental issues about LVH and heart failure remain unresolved. Although it is well known that hypertension can lead to LVH, which then heralds adverse events such as heart failure, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, and mortality, the mechanisms mediating these events remain unclear. Weber and Brilla articulated this long‐standing dilemma >20 years ago: "An explanation for why a presumptive adaptation such as LVH would prove pathological has been elusive."1 They too cited even earlier investigators such as Wearn, who wrote in 1940, "The frequent finding at necropsy of a hypertrophied heart that has failed is familiar to all. Other than the hypertrophy, the muscle of these hearts often shows no abnormalities. Why, then, should an enlarged muscle without demonstrable abnormality fail? Hypertrophy is frequently spoken of as being compensatory. On the other hand, it is also considered to be one of the most dependable signs of heart damage."2In this issue of the Journal of the American Heart Association, Tsao et al meticulously analyze carefully collected data from the Framingham Heart Study Offspring Cohort that exploit cardiovascular magnetic resonance measures of left ventricular mass and shape.3 With cardiovascular magnetic resonance, one can measure LVH robustly by measures of basal wall thickness or global myocardial mass after slicing the heart like a loaf of bread. Tsao et al used sophisticated statistical measures of "added prognostic value" to demonstrate, again, that LVH predicts adverse events beyond traditional risk factors even though participants had no manifestations of cardiovascular disease. In addition, going beyond simply LVH measurement, they reported that further alterations in shape and geometry, such as increases in mass/volume "concentricity" ratios, were also linked to adverse outcomes even after accounting for the changes in left ventricular mass.The fundamental paradox, however, remains unexplained: Why does an ostensibly compensatory mechanism lead to adverse outcomes? As a matter of convenience, many conceptualize LVH as increased muscle mass, but is it really so simple? We routinely measure the quantity of myocardial mass but seldom consider its quality.Perspectives on the persistent paradox may emerge by "thinking small" and examining the myocardium itself at the microscopic level. The difference between adaptive LVH (eg, athletic heart) and maladaptive pathologic LVH (eg, hypertensive heart disease and diabetic cardiomyopathy) might relate to the microarchitecture and whether myocardial fibrosis (including arteriolar perivascular fibrosis) and capillary rarefaction are present. The heart may be like other vital organs such as liver, lung, and kidney, in which organ dysfunction ensues following expansion of the interstitium by excessive collagen (fibrosis) or amyloid protein. These distinctions of parenchymal versus stromal disease are critically important for developing therapy because the focus for therapeutic targets shifts away from the cardiomyocyte toward the interstitium, specifically, the fibroblast, collagen, and regulatory enzymes contained within.Distinctions of parenchymal versus stromal disease also imply that cardiomyocyte dysfunction can result simply from a perturbed stromal milieu. In an elegant proof‐of‐concept study, Thum et al demonstrated precisely such a phenomenon.4 By selectively activating myocardial fibroblasts with microRNA to create myocardial fibrosis, they could create LVH and a heart failure phenotype in rodents. They went on to propose a new paradigm that "assigns a primary role to cardiac fibroblast activation in myocardial disease, rather than regarding [myocardial] fibrosis as secondary to cardiomyocyte damage." Bollano et al also showed systolic dysfunction from myocardial fibrosis without any evidence of disturbed energetics (phosphocreatine:ATP ratios) in a rodent diabetes model.5 In a sense, this interstitial heart disease paradigm adheres to the physiology of cardiac amyloidosis, in which interstitial expansion from presumably inert amyloid proteins leads to profound cardiac dysfunction, smoldering myocardial damage manifest by persistent low‐level troponin elevation, severe heart failure, arrhythmia, and a dismal prognosis with high mortality rates. Perhaps one can construe myocardial fibrosis as "amyloid lite," given its lesser interstitial expansion relative to cardiac amyloidosis.The interstitial heart disease paradigm is summarized in Figure. In further support of this concept that myocardial fibrosis damages the myocardium, Mohammed et al recently reported autopsy data from patients with LVH and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. They demonstrated both myocardial fibrosis (ie, increased collagen concentration) and decreased microvascular density (ie, rarefaction), regardless of whether epicardial coronary disease was present.6Download PowerPointFigure 1. Interstitial heart disease represents microscopic changes in the myocardial stroma mediated by excess collagen (mostly type I but also type III) secreted primarily by cardiac fibroblasts in the interstitium, a situation in which synthesis predominates over degradation.Myocardial fibrosis is reversible, but capillary rarefaction might not reverse.7 In an experimental model of LVH, Tyralla et al again observed decreased capillary density and myocardial fibrosis, but only the myocardial fibrosis reversed with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibition with captopril; decreased capillary density was not restored.8 Furthermore, treatment with alternative hypertension medications not expected to reverse fibrosis (eg, furosemide/dihydralazine) had no effect on either capillary density or myocardial fibrosis.Despite the apparent lack of recovery in capillary density, in a study involving patients with LVH and hypertension, 12 months of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibition with perindopril still culminated in recovery of perfusion reserve due to regression of perivascular fibrosis accompanied by LVH regression.9 Essentially, treatment with agents that inhibit the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system reverses fibrosis and then culminates in improvement in mechanical function and perfusion reserve. Importantly, these same agents also improved outcomes in heart failure trials. Nevertheless, the efficacy of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system agents is modest, and more potent antifibrotic agents are under development. These observations have been summarized previously.7How would one evaluate new antifibrotic agents? It is challenging to understand things that one cannot measure. Fortunately, novel cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques developed after Tsao et al commenced their study can now routinely measure the extracellular volume fraction (ECV) in human myocardium. ECV simply exploits the extracellular nature of gadolinium contrast and uses it as an extracellular space marker.10 After ≈10 minutes following a contrast bolus to permit equilibration between plasma and interstitial fluid, the myocardial uptake of gadolinium contrast relative to plasma is then a direct measure of the myocardial extracellular space. ECV is well validated and correlates highly with the collagen volume fraction, exhibiting high R2 values in the absence of myocardial edema or amyloidosis (ascertained clinically).11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ECV is also highly reproducible across separate cardiovascular magnetic resonance scans.7 Given the robustness of ECV measures and the biological importance of the cardiac interstitium, ECV predicts outcomes16, 17, 18, 19, 20 as robustly as ejection fraction, underscoring the negative impact of interstitial expansion.ECV essentially allows one to dichotomize the myocardium into its cardiomyocyte and interstitial components and to define the spectrum of myocardial fibrosis precisely. ECV is a powerful tool to investigate issues related to left ventricular "quantity" (eg, LVH) and compare it against measures of left ventricular quality (eg, myocardial fibrosis or even amyloidosis, depending on the clinical setting) in terms of their relationships to symptoms or prognosis. The cardiology community is finally poised to address paradoxical LVH observations by investigators over the past several decades.The work by Tsao et al3 further solidifies and refines our understanding of the role of left ventricular mass and geometry in mediating cardiovascular outcomes. We hope they and others will extend their observations using new cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques to examine the role of the cardiomyocyte compartment versus the interstitium compartment in health and disease among the Framingham Heart Study participants. With the evolution of newer cardiovascular magnetic resonance tools, we can begin making significant advances in understanding the meaning of the fundamental changes occurring at the microscopic level that are now detectable in human myocardium. Even more important, ECV can be used as a tool in phase II trials to judge the efficacy of novel anti–myocardial fibrosis therapeutics in development. These capabilities might change the way we conceptualize and treat LVH.DisclosuresDr Schelbert was supported by a grant from The Pittsburgh Foundation (PA), Grant M2009‐0068, and an American Heart Association Scientist Development grant (09SDG2180083) including a T. Franklin Williams Scholarship Award; funding provided by: Atlantic Philanthropies, Inc, the John A. Hartford Foundation, the Association of Specialty Professors, and the American Heart Association (Dallas, TX). He has accepted contrast material from Bracco Diagnostics for research purposes eyond the scope of this work. Dr Wong is supported by a grant from the American Heart Association and the Children's Cardiomyopathy Foundation. Dr Gheorghiade is a consultant for Abbott Laboratories, Astellas, Astra‐Zeneca, Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Cardiorentis Ltd, CorThera, Inc, Cytokinetics, Inc, DebioPharm SA, Errekappa Terapeutici (Milan, Italy), GlaxoSmithKline, Ikaria, Intersection Medical, Inc, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis Pharma AG, Ono Pharmaceuticals USA, Otsuka Pharmaceuticals, Palatin Technologies, Pericor Therapeutics, Protein Design Laboratories, Sanofi‐Aventis, Sigma Tau, Solvay Pharmaceuticals Sticares Inter‐ACT, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc, and Trevena Therapeutics.Footnotes*Correspondence to: Erik B. Schelbert, MD, MS, UPMC Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Center, Heart and Vascular Institute, and Clinical and Translational Science, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 200 Lothrop Street, PUH A349, Pittsburgh, PA 15101. E‐mail: [email protected]eduThe opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association.References1 Weber KT, Brilla CG. Pathological hypertrophy and cardiac interstitium. Fibrosis and renin‐angiotensin‐aldosterone system. Circulation. 1991; 83:1849–1865.LinkGoogle Scholar2 Wearn JT. Morphological and functional alterations of the coronary circulation: Harvey Lecture, April 18, 1940. Bull N Y Acad Med. 1941; 17:754–777.MedlineGoogle Scholar3 Tsao CW, Gona PN, Salton CJ, Chuang ML, Levy D, Manning WJ, O'Donnell CJ. Left ventricular structure and risk of cardiovascular events: a Framingham Heart Study Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015; 4:e002188 doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002188.LinkGoogle Scholar4 Thum T, Gross C, Fiedler J, Fischer T, Kissler S, Bussen M, Galuppo P, Just S, Rottbauer W, Frantz S, Castoldi M, Soutschek J, Koteliansky V, Rosenwald A, Basson MA, Licht JD, Pena JT, Rouhanifard SH, Muckenthaler MU, Tuschl T, Martin GR, Bauersachs J, Engelhardt S. MicroRNA‐21 contributes to myocardial disease by stimulating MAP kinase signalling in fibroblasts. Nature. 2008; 456:980–984.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Bollano E, Omerovic E, Svensson H, Waagstein F, Fu M. Cardiac remodeling rather than disturbed myocardial energy metabolism is associated with cardiac dysfunction in diabetic rats. Int J Cardiol. 2007; 114:195–201.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6 Mohammed SF, Hussain S, Mirzoyev SA, Edwards WD, Maleszewski JJ, Redfield MM. Coronary microvascular rarefaction and myocardial fibrosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2015; 131:550–559.LinkGoogle Scholar7 Schelbert EB, Fonarow GC, Bonow RO, Butler J, Gheorghiade M. Therapeutic targets in heart failure: refocusing on the myocardial interstitium. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63:2188–2198.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8 Tyralla K, Adamczak M, Benz K, Campean V, Gross ML, Hilgers KF, Ritz E, Amann K. High‐dose enalapril treatment reverses myocardial fibrosis in experimental uremic cardiomyopathy. PLoS One. 2011; 6:e15287.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9 Schwartzkopff B, Brehm M, Mundhenke M, Strauer BE. Repair of coronary arterioles after treatment with perindopril in hypertensive heart disease. Hypertension. 2000; 36:220–225.LinkGoogle Scholar10 Moon JC, Messroghli DR, Kellman P, Piechnik SK, Robson MD, Ugander M, Gatehouse PD, Arai AE, Friedrich MG, Neubauer S, Schulz‐Menger J, Schelbert EB. Myocardial T1 mapping and extracellular volume quantification: a Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) and CMR Working Group of the European Society of Cardiology consensus statement. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013; 15:92.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11 Flett AS, Hayward MP, Ashworth MT, Hansen MS, Taylor AM, Elliott PM, McGregor C, Moon JC. Equilibrium contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance for the measurement of diffuse myocardial fibrosis: preliminary validation in humans. Circulation. 2010; 122:138–144.LinkGoogle Scholar12 Aus dem Siepen F, Buss SJ, Messroghli D, Andre F, Lossnitzer D, Seitz S, Keller M, Schnabel PA, Giannitsis E, Korosoglou G, Katus HA, Steen H. T1 mapping in dilated cardiomyopathy with cardiac magnetic resonance: quantification of diffuse myocardial fibrosis and comparison with endomyocardial biopsy. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 16:210–216.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13 Miller CA, Naish J, Bishop P, Coutts G, Clark D, Zhao S, Ray SG, Yonan N, Williams SG, Flett AS, Moon JC, Greiser A, Parker GJ, Schmitt M. Comprehensive validation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques for the assessment of myocardial extracellular volume. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 6:373–383.LinkGoogle Scholar14 White SK, Sado DM, Fontana M, Banypersad SM, Maestrini V, Flett AS, Piechnik SK, Robson MD, Hausenloy DJ, Sheikh AM, Hawkins PN, Moon JC. T1 mapping for myocardial extracellular volume measurement by CMR: bolus only versus primed infusion technique. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 6:955–962.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15 de Meester de Ravenstein C, Bouzin C, Lazam S, Boulif J, Amzulescu M, Melchior J, Pasquet A, Vancraeynest D, Pouleur AC, Vanoverschelde JL, Gerber BL. Histological validation of measurement of diffuse interstitial myocardial fibrosis by myocardial extravascular volume fraction from Modified Look‐Locker imaging (MOLLI) T1 mapping at 3 T. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015; 17:48.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16 Wong TC, Piehler K, Meier CG, Testa SM, Klock AM, Aneizi AA, Shakesprere J, Kellman P, Shroff SG, Schwartzman DS, Mulukutla SR, Simon MA, Schelbert EB. Association between extracellular matrix expansion quantified by cardiovascular magnetic resonance and short‐term mortality. Circulation. 2012; 126:1206–1216.LinkGoogle Scholar17 Wong TC, Piehler K, Kang IA, Kadakkal A, Kellman P, Schwartzman DS, Mulukutla SR, Simon MA, Shroff SG, Kuller LH, Schelbert EB. Myocardial extracellular volume fraction quantified by cardiovascular magnetic resonance is increased in diabetes and associated with mortality and incident heart failure admission. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35:657–664.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18 Schelbert EB, Piehler KM, Zareba KM, Moon JC, Ugander M, Messroghli DR, Valeti U, Chang C‐CH, Shroff SG, Miller CA, Schmitt M, Kellman P, Butler J, Gheorghiade M, Wong TC. Extracellular matric expansion in non‐infarcted myocardium is associated with subsequent death, hospitalization for heart failure, or both across the ejection fraction spectrum (Abstract). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63:A1007.CrossrefGoogle Scholar19 Ghosn MG, Pickett S, Brunner G, Nabi F, Zoghbi W, Quinones M, Nambi V, Shah D. Association of myocardial extracellular volume and clinical outcome: a cardiac magnetic resonance study (Abstract). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 65:A1077.CrossrefGoogle Scholar20 Banypersad SM, Fontana M, Maestrini V, Sado DM, Captur G, Petrie A, Piechnik SK, Whelan CJ, Herrey AS, Gillmore JD, Lachmann HJ, Wechalekar AD, Hawkins PN, Moon JC. T1 mapping and survival in systemic light‐chain amyloidosis. Eur Heart J. 2014; 36:244–251.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Liang L, Wang X, Yu Y, Zhang Y, Liu J, Chen M, Zhang L and Jiang T (2022) T1 Mapping and Extracellular Volume in Cardiomyopathy Showing Left Ventricular Hypertrophy: Differentiation Between Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy and Hypertensive Heart Disease, International Journal of General Medicine, 10.2147/IJGM.S350673, Volume 15, (4163-4173) Graziani F, Lillo R and Crea F (2021) Rationale for the Use of Pirfenidone in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction, Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, 10.3389/fcvm.2021.678530, 8 Ibarrola J, Garaikoetxea M, Garcia-Peña A, Matilla L, Jover E, Bonnard B, Cuesta M, Fernández-Celis A, Jaisser F and López-Andrés N (2020) Beneficial Effects of Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonism on Myocardial Fibrosis in an Experimental Model of the Myxomatous Degeneration of the Mitral Valve, International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 10.3390/ijms21155372, 21:15, (5372) Lewis G, Schelbert E, Naish J, Bedson E, Dodd S, Eccleson H, Clayton D, Jimenez B, McDonagh T, Williams S, Cooper A, Cunnington C, Ahmed F, Viswesvaraiah R, Russell S, Neubauer S, Williamson P and Miller C (2019) Pirfenidone in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction—Rationale and Design of the PIROUETTE Trial, Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy, 10.1007/s10557-019-06876-y, 33:4, (461-470), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2019. Schelbert E, Sabbah H, Butler J and Gheorghiade M (2017) Employing Extracellular Volume Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Measures of Myocardial Fibrosis to Foster Novel Therapeutics, Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, 10:6, Online publication date: 1-Jun-2017. Vaduganathan M, Patel R, Shah S and Butler J (2016) Sudden cardiac death in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a target for therapy?, Heart Failure Reviews, 10.1007/s10741-016-9525-z, 21:4, (455-462), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2016. Schelbert E and Moon J (2015) Exploiting Differences in Myocardial Compartments With Native T1 and Extracellular Volume Fraction for the Diagnosis of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, 8:12, Online publication date: 1-Dec-2015. September 16, 2015Vol 4, Issue 9Article InformationMetrics © 2015 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.002491PMID: 26374296 Originally publishedSeptember 15, 2015 KeywordscollagenEditorialsmagnetic resonance imagingremodeling heart failureleft ventricular hypertrophyPDF download SubjectsCardiomyopathyComputerized Tomography (CT)HypertrophyRemodeling