Criteria for diagnosis of humoral rejection using the method of 2D-speckle-tracking echocardiography

Aim: to identify predictors of humoral rejection at different stages using non-invasive methods of 2D-speckletracking echocardiography, to determine the correlation with immunological changes.

Materials and methods. The study was conducted on the basis of Regional Clinic Hospital of Krasnodar from 2010 to 2017. The analysis of 181 heart recipients was performed. 5 groups were allocated due to the crisis of humoral rejection and the identified antibodies to donor leukocyte antigens (HLA antibodies): group 1 (n = 10) – DSA and humoral rejection, group 2 (n = 7), patients with non-DSA and humoral rejection, group 3 (n = 17) – patients with antibodies to HLA, no humoral rejection, group 4 (n = 11), humoral crisis of rejection, with no identified HLA antibodies, group 5 (n = 87) – patients do not have antibodies to HLA and signs of both humoral and cellular rejection according to EMB. Recipients were carried out endomyocardial biopsy, immunological study, 2D-speckle-tracking echocardiography, statistical methods.

Results. The diagnostic criteria for a humoral rejection is greater than 1 degree are global peak systolic strain or strain rate of left ventricle (GLPSLV) – 9.94 ± 1.37% (the sensitivity was 86.2%, specificity – 90.4%); radial systolic strain (RadSLV) of 19.36 ± 3.66% (sensitivity was 75.8%, specificity – 84.5%); circumferential systolic strain (CiRSLV) – 17.83 ± 4.79% (sensitivity was 78.6%, specificity – 84.4%); the twisting of the left ventricle (twist) – 8.90 ± 1.85% (sensitivity – 66.7%, specificity – 94.2%), p < 0.001. When considering indicators GLPSLV and longitudinal peak strain of the right ventricle (GLPSRV) in the diagnosis of humoral rejection sensitivity increases to 91.9%, specificity increases to 94.6%, p < 0.001.

Conclusion. GLPSLV has greater sensitivity at the stage of subclinical changes. It is more significantly reduced with increasing degree of rejection associated with episodes of rejection in comparison with other parameters and deformation mechanics. The interrelation between histological and immunological changes and impaired myocardial deformation. The proposed diagnostic algorithm will predict humoral rejection.

1. Gautier SV, Shevchenko AO, Poptsov VN. Pacient s transplantirovannym serdcem: rukovodstvo dlja vrachej po vedeniju pacientov, perenesshih transplantaciju serdca. М.: Триада, 2014. 143.

2. Mareev VYu, Fomin IV, Ageev FT, Begrambekova YuL, Vasyuk YuA, Garganeeva AA et al. Russian Heart Failure Society, Russian Society of Cardiology. Russian Scientific Medical Society of Internal Medicine Guidelines for Heart failure: chronic (CHF) and acute decompensated (ADHF). Diagnosis, prevention and treatment. Cardiologiya. 2018; 58 (S6): 8–158.

3. Husain AN, Mirza KM. Routine C4d immunohistochemistry in cardiac allografts: long-term outcomes. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017; 36 (12): 1329–1331.

4. Dandel M, Hummel M. Association between acute rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2003; 850–859.

5. Berry J. The 2013 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Working Formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the pathologic diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2013; 32 (12): 1147–1162.

6. Bader FM. Noninvasive diagnosis of cardiac allograft rejection using echocardiography indices of systolic and diastolic function. Transplant. 2011; 43 (10): 387.

7. Насырова АА, Шевченко АО. Функциональные показатели магистральных артерий и риск отторжения трансплантированного сердца. Трансплантология: итоги и перспективы. Том VII. 2015 год. Под ред. С.В. Готье. М.–Тверь: Триада, 2016: 331–354.

8. Stewart S, Winters GL, Fishbein MC, Tazelaar HD, Kobashigawa J, Abrams J et al. Revision of the 1990 working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart rejection. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005 Nov; 24 (11): 1710–1720.

9. Kobashigawa JA. Report from a consensus conference on antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2011; 30 (3): 252–269.

10. Costanzo MR. The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2010; 29 (8): 914–956.

11. Berry GJ, Angelini A, Burke MM. The ISHLT working formulation for pathologic diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplantation: evolution and current status (2005–2011). J Heart Lung Transplant. 2011; 30: 601–611. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2011.02.015.

12. Stehlik J, Edwards LB, Kucheryavaya AY. The Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Twenty-eighth Adult Heart Transplant Report – 2011. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2011; 30: 1078– 1094. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2011.08.003.

13. Smith JD, Danskine AJ, Laylor RM. The effect of panel reactive antibodies and the donor specific crossmatch on graft survival after heart and heart-lung transplantation. Transpl Immunol. 1993; 1: 60–65.

14. Soleimani B, Lechler RI, Hornick PI. Role of alloantibodies in the pathogenesis of graft arteriosclerosis in cardiac transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2006; 6: 1781– 1785. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01401.x.

15. O’Connor MJ, Keeshan BC, Lin KY, Monos D, Lind C, Paridon SM et al. Changes in the methodology of preheart transplant human leukocyte antibody assessment: an analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Clin Transplant. 2015; 842–850. doi: 10.1111/ctr.12590.

16. Badano L. European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging / Cardiovascular Imaging Department of the Brazilian Society of Cardiology recommendations for the use of cardiac imaging to assess and follow patients after heart transplantation European Heart Journal. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 16 (9): 919–948.

17. Alekhin MN. Ul’trazvukovye metodiki ocenki deformacii miokarda i ih klinicheskoe znachenie. Dvuhmernoe otslezhivanie pjaten seroj shkaly ul’trazvukovogo izobrazhenija miokarda v ocenke ego deformacii i skruchivanija. Ul’trazvukovaja i funkcion. diagnostika. 2011; 3: 107–119.

18. Petrova EB. VVI Technique Possibilities in the Assessment of the Indices of Left Ventricular Systolic Function and All Its Segments. Klinicheskaja medicina. 2013; 5: 56–63. [In Russ, English abstract].

19. Stavenchuk TV, Kosmachova ED, Slavinsky AA, Chuprinenko LM, Shelestova IA, Barbuhatty KO, Porkhanov VA. The role of speckle-tracking echocardiography technique at the stage of subclinical heart transplant rejection. Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs. 2015; 4: 25–32. [In Russ, English abstract].

20. Stavenchuk TV, Kosmachova ED, Shelestova IA, Barbuhatty KO, Porkhanov VA. The role of noninvasive echocardiography techniques in the diagnostics of heart graft complications. Kreativnaja kardiologija. 2016; 2: 171–181. [In Russ, English abstract].

21. Abduch MC, Alencar AM, Mathias WJr, Vieira ML. Cardiac mechanics evaluated by speckle tracking echocardiography. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2014; 102 (4): 403–412.

22. Clemmensen TS, Løgstrup BB, Eiskjær Н, Poulsen SH. Changes in longitudinal myocardial deformation during acute cardiac rejection: the clinical role of two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015; 28 (3): 330–339.

23. Clemmensen TS, Løgstrup BB, Eiskjær Н, Poulsen SH. Evaluation of longitudinal myocardial deformation by 2-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography in heart transplant recipients: relation to coronary allograft vasculopathy. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015; 34 (2): 195–203.

24. Holly G .Assessment of Myocardial Mechanics Using Speckle Tracking Echocardiography: Fundamentals and Clinical Applications. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010; 23 (4): 351–369.

25. Dalen H, Thornstensen A, Aase SA.Segmental and global longitudinal strain and strain rate based on echocardiography of 1266 helathy individuals: the HUNT study in Norway. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2010; 11 (2): 176–183.

26. Ambardekar AV, Alluri N, Patel А. Myocardial Strain and Strain ratefrom Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography are Unable to Differentiate Asymptomatic BiopsyProven Cellular Rejection in the First Year after Cardiac Transplantation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015; 28 (4): 478–485.

27. Goland S. Changes in left and right ventricular function of donor hearts during the first year after heart transplantation. Heart. 2011; 97: 20: 1681–1686.

28. Barakat AF, Sperry BW, Starling RC. Prognosic utility of right ventricular Free Wall Strain in Low Risk Patients after Orthotopic Heart Transplantation. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2017; 1: 189–1895.

29. Stavenchuk TV. Kliniko-diagnosticheskaja harakteristika jehokardiograficheskih i patomorfologicheskih priznakov ottorzhenija u recipientov posle transplantacii serdca. [Dissertation]. К., 2017, 156.

30. Kato T S. Strain rate imaging would predict sub-clinical acute rejection in heart transplant recipients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2010; 37 (5): 1104–1110.

31. Marciniak А. The potentional role of ultrasonic Strain imaging and immunophenotyping in diagnosing acute rejection after heart transplantation. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2007; 8 (3): 213–221.

32. Mingo-Santos S. Usefulness of Two-Dimensional Strain Parameters to Diagnose Acute Rejection after Heart Transplantation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015; 28 (10): 1149–1156.

33. Shevchenko AO, Tunyaeva IU, Nasyrova AA. Common carotid artery wall rigidity index is a marker of cardiac allograft rejection. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. 2015; 4S: S298.

34. Sera F, Kato TS, Farr M. Left ventricular longitudinal strain by speckle-tracking echocardiography is associated with treatment – requiring cardiac allograft rejection. J Cardiac fail.2014; 20: 359–364.