Diagnostic Accuracy of Tissue Doppler Index E/è for Evaluating Left Ventricular Filling Pressure and Diastolic Dysfunction/Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

BACKGROUND: Tissue Doppler index E/è is used clinically and in multidisciplinary research for estimation of left ventricular filling pressure (LVFP) and diastolic dysfunction (DD)/heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Its diagnostic accuracy is not well studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: From the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane databases, we identified 24 studies reporting E/è and invasive LVFP in preserved EF (≥50%). In random‐effects models, E/è had poor to mediocre linear correlation with LVFP. Summary sensitivity and specificity (with 95% CIs) for the American Society of Echocardiography–recommended E/è cutoffs (lateral, mean, and septal, respectively) to identify elevated LVFP was estimated by using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic analysis. Summary sensitivity was 30% (9–48%), 37% (13–61%), and 24% (6–46%), and summary specificity was 92% (82–100%), 91% (80–99%), and 98% (92–100%). Positive likelihood ratio (LR+) was <5 for lateral and mean E/è. LR+ was slightly >10 for septal E/è obtained from 4 studies (cumulative sample size <220). For excluding elevated LVFP, summary sensitivity for E/è (lateral, mean, and septal, respectively) was 64% (38–86%), 36% (3–74%), and 50% (14–81%), while summary specificity was 73% (54–89%), 83% (49–100%), and 89% (66–100%). Because of data set limitations, meaningful inference for identifying HFpEF by using E/è could not be drawn. With the use of quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies questionnaire), we found substantial risks of bias and/or applicability. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support that E/è can reliably estimate LVFP in preserved EF. The diagnostic accuracy of E/è to identify/exclude elevated LVFP and DD/HFpEF is limited and requires further validation in a well‐designed prospective clinical trial.