Search

Background The Whitehall II (WHII) study of British civil servants provides a unique source of longitudinal data to investigate key factors hypothesized to affect brain health and cognitive ageing. This paper introduces the multi-modal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol and cognitive assessment designed to investigate brain health in a random sample of 800 members of the WHII study. Methods/design A total of 6035 civil servants participated in the WHII Phase 11 clinical examination in 2012-2013. A random sample of these participants was included in a sub-study comprising an MRI brain scan, a detailed clinical and cognitive assessment, and collection of blood and buccal mucosal samples for the characterisation of immune function and associated measures. Data collection for this sub-study started in 2012 and will be completed by 2016. The participants, for whom social and health records have been collected since 1985, were between 60-85 years of age at the time the MRI study started. Here, we describe the pre- specified clinical and cognitive assessment protocols, the state-of-the-art MRI sequences and latest pipelines for analyses of this sub-study. Discussion The integration of cutting-edge MRI techniques, clinical and cognitive tests in combination with retrospective data on social, behavioural and biological variables during the preceding 25 years from a well-established longitudinal epidemiological study (WHII cohort) will provide a unique opportunity to examine brain structure and function in relation to age- related diseases and the modifiable and non-modifiable factors affecting resilience against and vulnerability to adverse brain changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An abstract of the article "Cusp fusion pattern in bicuspid aortic valve disease predicts severity of aortic flow abnormalities," by Malenka M. Bissell and colleagues is presented.

An abstract of the article "Evaluation of Circulation, Γ, as a quantifying metric in 4D flow MRI," by Aaron T. Hess, Malenka M. Bissell, Steffan J. Glaze, Alex Pitcher, Saul Myerson, Stefan Neubauer, and Matthew D. Robson is presented.

An abstract of the conference paper "3D cardiac navigation with rapid multi shot EPI," by Aaron T. Hess and colleagues is presented.

Background: Abnormal aortic flow patterns in bicuspid aortic valve disease (BAV) may be partly responsible for the associated aortic dilation. Aortic valve replacement (AVR) may normalize flow patterns and potentially slow the concomitant aortic dilation. We therefore sought to examine differences in flow patterns post AVR. Methods: Ninety participants underwent 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance: 30 BAV patients with prior AVR (11 mechanical, 10 bioprosthetic, 9 Ross procedure), 30 BAV patients with a native aortic valve and 30 healthy subjects. Results: The majority of subjects with mechanical AVR or Ross showed normal flow pattern (73% and 67% respectively) with near normal rotational flow values (7.2 ± 3.9 and 10.6 ± 10.5 mm2/ms respectively vs 3.8 ± 3.1 mm2/s for healthy subjects; both p > 0.05); and reduced in-plane wall shear stress (0.19 ± 0.13 N/m2 for mechanical AVR vs. 0.40 ± 0.28 N/m2 for native BAV, p < 0.05). In contrast, all subjects with a bioprosthetic AVR had abnormal flow patterns (mainly marked right-handed helical flow), with comparable rotational flow values to native BAV (20.7 ± 8.8 mm2/ms and 26.6 ± 16.6 mm2/ms respectively, p > 0.05), and a similar pattern for wall shear stress. Data before and after AVR (n = 16) supported these findings: mechanical AVR showed a significant reduction in rotational flow (30.4 ± 16.3 → 7.3 ± 4.1 mm2/ms; p < 0.05) and in-plane wall shear stress (0.47 ± 0.20 → 0.20 ± 0.13 N/m2; p < 0.05), whereas these parameters remained similar in the bioprosthetic AVR group. Conclusions: Abnormal flow patterns in BAV disease tend to normalize after mechanical AVR or Ross procedure, in contrast to the remnant abnormal flow pattern after bioprosthetic AVR. This may in part explain different aortic growth rates post AVR in BAV observed in the literature, but requires confirmation in a prospective study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]