Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-l4t7p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-18T16:34:31.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Myocardial perfusion and function dichotomy in growth restricted preterm infants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2022

Arvind Sehgal*
Affiliation:
Monash Newborn, Monash Children’s Hospital, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Department of Pediatrics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
Beth J. Allison
Affiliation:
The Ritchie Centre, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
Suzanne L. Miller
Affiliation:
The Ritchie Centre, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
Graeme R. Polglase
Affiliation:
The Ritchie Centre, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
*
Address for correspondence: Arvind Sehgal, Neonatologist, Monash Children’s Hospital, Head, Neonatal Cardiovascular Research, Adjunct Professor of Paediatrics, Monash University, 246, Clayton Road, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3168, Australia. Email: Arvind.Sehgal@monash.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Compared to preterm appropriate for gestational age (AGA) fetuses, fetuses with fetal growth restriction (FGR) have earlier visualisation of coronary artery blood flow (CABF) but impaired cardiac function. This dichotomy remains uncharacterised during postnatal life. This study compared CABF and cardiac function in preterm FGR infants, against AGA infants during the postnatal period. FGR was defined as birthweight < 10th centile for gestation and sex with absent/reversed antenatal umbilical artery Doppler. Diastolic CABF was measured in the left anterior descending coronary artery. Twenty-eight FGR infants were compared with 26 AGA infants (gestation and birthweight, 29.7 ± 1.3 vs 29.9 ± 1 weeks, P = 0.6 and 918 ± 174 vs 1398 ± 263g, P < 0.001, respectively). Echocardiography was performed in the second week of life. FGR infants had higher CABF (velocity time integral, 2.4 ± 0.9 vs 1.6 ± 0.8 cm, P = 0.002). Diastolic function was impaired (↑ trans-mitral E/A ratio in FGR infants; 0.84 ± 0.05 vs 0.79 ± 0.03, P = 0.0002) while the systolic function was also affected (mean velocity of circumferential fibre shortening [mVCFc], 1.9 ± 0.3 vs 2.7 ± 0.5 circ/s, P < 0.001). Indexing CABF to cardiac function noted significant differences between the groups (CABF: E/A [FGR vs AGA], 2.9 ± 1.1 vs 2.1 ± 1, P = 0.01 and CABF: mVCFc [FGR vs AGA], 1.3 ± 0.5 vs 0.6 ± 0.3, P < 0.001). Diastolic blood pressure (BP) was significantly higher, and CABF to diastolic BP ratio trended higher in FGR infants (30 ± 2 vs 25 ± 3 mmHg, P < 0.001 and 0.08 ± 0.03 vs 0.06 ± 0.03, P = 0.059, respectively). Greater CABF in FGR infants did not translate into better cardiac function. This dichotomy may be a persistent response to fetal hypoxaemia (fetal programming) and/or reflection of altered cardiac architecture.

Information

Type
Original Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with International Society for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Coronary artery imaging. Panel A: Short axis view showing coronary artery origin. Panel B: Colour Doppler. Panel C: Pulse wave Doppler showing predominant diastolic trace.

Figure 1

Table 1. Demographic and clinical variables

Figure 2

Table 2. Comparison of echocardiographic variables of cardiac function

Figure 3

Table 3. Comparison of coronary indices

Figure 4

Table 4. Previous studies in human neonates documenting coronary indices

Figure 5

Fig. 2. Interaction of various haemodynamic forces in the hypoxaemic milieu.