Top

Published in:

01-02-2011

Cellular and Functional Imaging of Cardiac Transplant Rejection

Authors: Yijen L. Wu, Qing Ye, Chien Ho

Published in: Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports | Issue 1/2011

Abstract

Heart transplantation is now an established treatment for patients suffering from end-stage heart diseases. With the advances in immunosuppressive treatment, the survival rate for transplant patients has improved greatly. However, allograft rejection, both acute and chronic, after heart transplantation is still a limitation leading to morbidity and mortality. The current clinical gold standard for screening rejection is endomyocardial biopsy (EMB), which is not only invasive, but also error-prone, due to the limited sample size and the site location of sampling. It would be highly desirable to have reliable and noninvasive alternatives for EMB in monitoring cardiac allograft rejection. The objective of this review is to highlight how cardiovascular imaging can contribute to noninvasively detecting and to evaluating both acute and chronic allograft rejection after heart transplantation, in particular, cardiovascular MRI (CMRI); and how CMRI can assess both immune cell infiltration at the rejecting organ, and the cardiac dysfunctions resulting from allograft rejection.

Nair V, Butany J: Heart transplant biopsies: interpretation and significance. J Clin Pathol 2010, 63:12–20.CrossRefPubMed

Stewart S, Winters GL, Fishbein MC, et al.: Revision of the 1990 working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart rejection. J Heart Lung Transplant 2005, 24:1710–1720.CrossRefPubMed

Mehra MR, Crespo-Leiro MG, Dipchand A, et al.: International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation working formulation of a standardized nomenclature for cardiac allograft vasculopathy--2010. J Heart Lung Transplant 2010, 29:717–727.CrossRefPubMed

Christen T, Shimizu K, Libby P: Advances in imaging of cardiac allograft rejection. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 2010, 3:99–105.CrossRef

Estep JD, Shah DJ, Nagueh SF, et al.: The role of multimodality cardiac imaging in the transplanted heart. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009, 2:1126–1140.CrossRefPubMed

Butler CR, Thompson R, Haykowsky M, et al.: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of acute heart transplant rejection: a review. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2009, 11:7.CrossRefPubMed

Mondillo S, Maccherini M, Galderisi M: Usefulness and limitations of transthoracic echocardiography in heart transplantation recipients. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2008, 6:2.CrossRefPubMed

Mehra MR, Uber PA, Benitez RM: Gene-based bio-signature patterns and cardiac allograft rejection. Heart Fail Clin 2010, 6:87–92.CrossRefPubMed

• Christen T, Nahrendorf M, Wildgruber M, et al.: Molecular imaging of innate immune cell function in transplant rejection. Circulation 2009, 119:1925–1932. The authors took a step further to investigate which macrophage functions are important in allograft rejection by probing the innate immunity with quenched fluorescent substrate reporter for cathepsin proteases and a nanoparticle-based phagocytosis sensor, along with cellular MRI tracking macrophages in vivo in a mouse model.

10.

Lindenfeld J, Miller GG, Shakar SF, et al.: Drug therapy in the heart transplant recipient: part II: immunosuppressive drugs. Circulation 2004, 110:3858–3865.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Gradek WQ, D’Amico C, Smith AL, et al.: Routine surveillance endomyocardial biopsy continues to detect significant rejection late after heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 2001, 20:497–502.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Fishbein MC, Kobashigawa J: Biopsy-negative cardiac transplant rejection: etiology, diagnosis, and therapy. Curr Opin Cardiol 2004, 19:166–169.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Jimenez J, Kapadia SR, Yamani MH, et al.: Cellular rejection and rate of progression of transplant vasculopathy: a 3-year serial intravascular ultrasound study. J Heart Lung Transplant 2001, 20:393–398.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Yamani MH, Yousufuddin M, Starling RC, et al.: Does acute cellular rejection correlate with cardiac allograft vasculopathy? J Heart Lung Transplant 2004, 23:272–276.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Mitchell RN: Graft vascular disease: immune response meets the vessel wall. Annu Rev Pathol 2009, 4:19–47.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Suzuki J, Isobe M, Morishita R, Nagai R: Characteristics of chronic rejection in heart transplantation: important elements of pathogenesis and future treatments. Circ J 2010, 74:233–239.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Martins PN: Assessment of graft function in rodent models of heart transplantation. Microsurgery 2008, 28:565–570.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Steinbruchel DA, Nielsen B, Salomon S, Kemp E: A new model for heterotopic heart transplantation in rodents: graft atrial septectomy. Transplant Proc 1994, 26:1298–1299.PubMed

19.

Asfour B, Hare JM, Kohl T, et al. : A simple new model of physiologically working heterotopic rat heart transplantation provides hemodynamic performance equivalent to that of an orthotopic heart. J Heart Lung Transplant 1999, 18:927–936.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Hasegawa T, Visovatti SH, Hyman MC, et al.: Heterotopic vascularized murine cardiac transplantation to study graft arteriopathy. Nat Protoc 2007, 2:471–480.CrossRefPubMed

21.

• Kanno S, Wu YJ, Lee PC, et al.: Macrophage accumulation associated with rat cardiac allograft rejection detected by magnetic resonance imaging with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles. Circulation 2001, 104:934–938. This is the first successful demonstration of in vivo detection of macrophage accumulation in the rejecting allograft hearts with MRI and its relationship with immunosuppressive agents in a rodent non-working heart model.

22.

• Wu YL, Ye Q, Sato K, et al.: Noninvasive evaluation of cardiac allograft rejection by cellular and functional cardiac magnetic resonance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009, 2:731–741. The authors used a two-pronged cellular and functional MRI approach to evaluate cardiac rejection in a rodent working heart transplant model by simultaneously monitoring both the macrophage accumulation in the rejecting hearts and local ventricular wall motion with fine strain analysis. The results show that the early mild allograft rejection is very heterogeneous and that the multiparameter CMRI has the potential to provide accurate noninvasive diagnosis of cardiac rejection.

23.

Ho C, Hitchens TK: A non-invasive approach to detecting organ rejection by MRI: Monitoring the accumulation of immune cell cells at the transplanted organ. Curr Pharmaceut Biotechnol 2004, 5:551–566.CrossRef

24.

Wu Y-JL, Sato K, Qing Y, Ho C: MRI investigation of graft rejection following organ transplantation using rodent models. Method Enzymol 2004, 386:73–105.CrossRef

25.

• Wu YL, Ye Q, Foley LM, et al. : In situ labeling of immune cells with iron oxide particles: an approach to detect organ rejection by cellular MRI. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006, 103:1852–1857. Using the micrometer-sized MPIO and the USPIO particles to monitor macrophage infiltration in a rodent working heart transplantation model, the results show temporal progression of macrophage infiltration in vivo.

26.

• Ye Q, Wu YL, Foley LM, et al.: Longitudinal tracking of recipient macrophages in a rat chronic cardiac allograft rejection model with noninvasive magnetic resonance imaging using micrometer-sized paramagnetic iron oxide particles. Circulation 2008, 118:149–156. This article reports a longitudinal monitoring of macrophage accumulation for more than 3 months in a single gene–mismatched chronic cardiac rejection transplantation model. The results show that macrophages labeled with MPIO can serve as an early marker for CAV.

27.

Kobashigawa JA, Patel JK: Immunosuppression for heart transplantation: where are we now? Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med 2006, 3:203–212.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Shirwan H, Wu GD, Barwari L, et al.: Induction of allograft nonresponsiveness after intrathymic inoculation with donor class I allopeptides. II. Evidence for persistent chronic rejection despite high levels of donor microchimerism. Transplantation 1997, 64:1671–1676.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Bellenger NG, Marcus NJ, Davies C, et al.: Left ventricular function and mass after orthotopic heart transplantation: a comparison of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with echocardiography. J Heart Lung Transplant 2000, 19:444–452.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Marie PY, Angioi M, Carteaux JP, et al. : Detection and prediction of acute heart transplant rejection with the myocardial T2 determination provided by a black-blood magnetic resonance imaging sequence. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:825–831.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Almenar L, Igual B, Martinez-Dolz L, et al.: Utility of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of heart transplant rejection. Transplant Proc 2003, 35:1962–1964.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Muehling OM, Wilke NM, Panse P, et al.: Reduced myocardial perfusion reserve and transmural perfusion gradient in heart transplant arteriopathy assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42:1054–1060.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Rivard AL, Swingen CM, Blake D, et al.: A comparison of myocardial perfusion and rejection in cardiac transplant patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2007, 23:575–582.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Taylor AJ, Vaddadi G, Pfluger H, et al.: Diagnostic performance of multisequential cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in acute cardiac allograft rejection. Eur J Heart Fail 2010, 12:45–51.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Kim YJ, Kang SM, Hur J, et al.: Images in cardiovascular medicine. Chronic cardiac transplant rejection: evaluation with magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 2008, 118:885–886.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Usta E, Burgstahler C, Aebert H, et al.: The challenge to detect heart transplant rejection and transplant vasculopathy non-invasively--a pilot study. J Cardiothorac Surg 2009, 4:43.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Caus T, Kober F, Marin P, et al.: Non-invasive diagnostic of cardiac allograft vasculopathy by 31P magnetic resonance chemical shift imaging. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006, 29:45–49.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Johansson L, Johnsson C, Penno E, et al.: Acute cardiac transplant rejection: detection and grading with MR imaging with a blood pool contrast agent--experimental study in the rat. Radiology 2002, 225:97–103.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Penno E, Johnsson C, Johansson L, Ahlstrom H: Macrophage uptake of ultra-small iron oxide particles for magnetic resonance imaging in experimental acute cardiac transplant rejection. Acta Radiol 2006, 47:264–271.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Beckmann N, Cannet C, Zurbruegg S, et al.: Macrophage infiltration detected at MR imaging in rat kidney allografts: early marker of chronic rejection? Radiology 2006, 240:717–724.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Ye Q, Yang D, Williams M, et al.: In vivo detection of acute rat renal allograft rejection by MRI with USPIO particles. Kidney Int 2002, 61:1124–1135.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Yang D, Ye Q, Williams M, et al. : USPIO-enhanced dynamic MRI: evaluation of normal and transplanted rat kidneys. Magn Reson Med 2001, 46:1152–1163.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Arbab AS, Yocum GT, Kalish H, et al.: Efficient magnetic cell labeling with protamine sulfate complexed to ferumoxides for cellular MRI. Blood 2004, 104:1217–1223.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Bernd H, De Kerviler E, Gaillard S, Bonnemain B: Safety and tolerability of ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide contrast agent: comprehensive analysis of a clinical development program. Invest Radiol 2009, 44:336–342.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Williams JB, Ye Q, Hitchens TK, et al.: MRI detection of macrophages labeled using micrometer-sized iron oxide particles. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007, 25:1210–1218.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Shapiro EM, Skrtic S, Koretsky AP: Sizing it up: cellular MRI using micron-sized iron oxide particles. Magn Reson Med 2005, 53:329–338.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Shapiro EM, Sharer K, Skrtic S, Koretsky AP: In vivo detection of single cells by MRI. Magn Reson Med 2006, 55:242–249.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Chen C, Zhang H, Ye Q, et al.: A new nano-sized iron-oxide particle with high sensitivity for cellular magnetic resonance imaging. Mol Imaging Biol 2010, In press.

49.

Dandel M, Hetzer R: Echocardiographic strain and strain rate imaging--clinical applications. Int J Cardiol 2009, 132:11–24.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Kato TS, Oda N, Hashimura K, et al.: Strain rate imaging would predict sub-clinical acute rejection in heart transplant recipients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2010, 37:1104–1110.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Cellular and Functional Imaging of Cardiac Transplant Rejection
Authors: Yijen L. Wu
Qing Ye
Chien Ho
Publication date: 01-02-2011
Publisher: Current Science Inc.
Published in: Current Cardiovascular Imaging Reports / Issue 1/2011
Print ISSN: 1941-9066
Electronic ISSN: 1941-9074
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-010-9055-3

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Heart Failure Video

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Cellular and Functional Imaging of Cardiac Transplant Rejection

Abstract

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Imaging of Oxidation-Specific Epitopes in Atherosclerosis and Macrophage-Rich Vulnerable Plaques

18F-FDG PET Imaging of Atherosclerosis—A New Approach to Detect Inflamed, High-Risk Coronary Plaques?

Emerging Approaches for Cardiovascular Stem Cell Imaging

Molecular MRI of Thrombosis

Imaging Myeloperoxidase Activity in Cardiovascular Disease

Molecular Imaging of Healing After Myocardial Infarction

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page