Cargando…

Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems

BACKGROUND: Although mechanical dyssynchrony parameters derived by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) may predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), comparability of parameters derived with different STE vendors is unknown. METHODS: In the MARC study, echocardiographic images...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Everdingen, Wouter M., Maass, Alexander H., Vernooy, Kevin, Meine, Mathias, Allaart, Cornelis P., De Lange, Frederik J., Teske, Arco J., Geelhoed, Bastiaan, Rienstra, Michiel, Van Gelder, Isabelle C., Vos, Marc A., Cramer, Maarten J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5648447/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29047378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12947-017-0116-5
_version_ 1783272396381224960
author van Everdingen, Wouter M.
Maass, Alexander H.
Vernooy, Kevin
Meine, Mathias
Allaart, Cornelis P.
De Lange, Frederik J.
Teske, Arco J.
Geelhoed, Bastiaan
Rienstra, Michiel
Van Gelder, Isabelle C.
Vos, Marc A.
Cramer, Maarten J.
author_facet van Everdingen, Wouter M.
Maass, Alexander H.
Vernooy, Kevin
Meine, Mathias
Allaart, Cornelis P.
De Lange, Frederik J.
Teske, Arco J.
Geelhoed, Bastiaan
Rienstra, Michiel
Van Gelder, Isabelle C.
Vos, Marc A.
Cramer, Maarten J.
author_sort van Everdingen, Wouter M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although mechanical dyssynchrony parameters derived by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) may predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), comparability of parameters derived with different STE vendors is unknown. METHODS: In the MARC study, echocardiographic images of heart failure patients obtained before CRT implantation were prospectively analysed with vendor specific STE software (GE EchoPac and Philips QLAB) and vendor-independent software (TomTec 2DCPA). Response was defined as change in left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume between examination before and six-months after CRT implantation. Basic longitudinal strain and mechanical dyssynchrony parameters (septal to lateral wall delay (SL-delay), septal systolic rebound stretch (SRSsept), and systolic stretch index (SSI)) were obtained from either separate septal and lateral walls, or total LV apical four chamber. Septal strain patterns were categorized in three types. The coefficient of variation and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were analysed. Dyssynchrony parameters were associated with CRT response using univariate regression analysis and C-statistics. RESULTS: Two-hundred eleven patients were analysed. GE-cohort (n = 123): age 68 years (interquartile range (IQR): 61–73), 67% male, QRS-duration 177 ms (IQR: 160–192), LV ejection fraction: 26 ± 7%. Philips-cohort (n = 88): age 67 years (IQR: 59–74), 60% male, QRS-duration: 179 ms (IQR: 166–193), LV ejection fraction: 27 ± 8. LV derived peak strain was comparable in the GE- (GE: -7.3 ± 3.1%, TomTec: −6.4 ± 2.8%, ICC: 0.723) and Philips-cohort (Philips: −7.7 ± 2.7%, TomTec: −7.7 ± 3.3%, ICC: 0.749). SL-delay showed low ICC values (GE vs. TomTec: 0.078 and Philips vs. TomTec: 0.025). ICC’s of SRSsept and SSI were higher but only weak (GE vs. TomTec: SRSsept: 0.470, SSI: 0.467) (Philips vs. QLAB: SRSsept: 0.419, SSI: 0.421). Comparability of septal strain patterns was low (Cohen’s kappa, GE vs. TomTec: 0.221 and Philips vs. TomTec: 0.279). Septal strain patterns, SRSsept and SSI were associated with changes in LV end-systolic volume for all vendors. SRSsept and SSI had relative varying C-statistic values (range: 0.530–0.705) and different cut-off values between vendors. CONCLUSIONS: Although global longitudinal strain analysis showed fair comparability, assessment of dyssynchrony parameters was vendor specific and not applicable outside the context of the implemented platform. While the standardization taskforce took an important step for global peak strain, further standardization of STE is still warranted. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12947-017-0116-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5648447
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56484472017-10-26 Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems van Everdingen, Wouter M. Maass, Alexander H. Vernooy, Kevin Meine, Mathias Allaart, Cornelis P. De Lange, Frederik J. Teske, Arco J. Geelhoed, Bastiaan Rienstra, Michiel Van Gelder, Isabelle C. Vos, Marc A. Cramer, Maarten J. Cardiovasc Ultrasound Research BACKGROUND: Although mechanical dyssynchrony parameters derived by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) may predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), comparability of parameters derived with different STE vendors is unknown. METHODS: In the MARC study, echocardiographic images of heart failure patients obtained before CRT implantation were prospectively analysed with vendor specific STE software (GE EchoPac and Philips QLAB) and vendor-independent software (TomTec 2DCPA). Response was defined as change in left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume between examination before and six-months after CRT implantation. Basic longitudinal strain and mechanical dyssynchrony parameters (septal to lateral wall delay (SL-delay), septal systolic rebound stretch (SRSsept), and systolic stretch index (SSI)) were obtained from either separate septal and lateral walls, or total LV apical four chamber. Septal strain patterns were categorized in three types. The coefficient of variation and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were analysed. Dyssynchrony parameters were associated with CRT response using univariate regression analysis and C-statistics. RESULTS: Two-hundred eleven patients were analysed. GE-cohort (n = 123): age 68 years (interquartile range (IQR): 61–73), 67% male, QRS-duration 177 ms (IQR: 160–192), LV ejection fraction: 26 ± 7%. Philips-cohort (n = 88): age 67 years (IQR: 59–74), 60% male, QRS-duration: 179 ms (IQR: 166–193), LV ejection fraction: 27 ± 8. LV derived peak strain was comparable in the GE- (GE: -7.3 ± 3.1%, TomTec: −6.4 ± 2.8%, ICC: 0.723) and Philips-cohort (Philips: −7.7 ± 2.7%, TomTec: −7.7 ± 3.3%, ICC: 0.749). SL-delay showed low ICC values (GE vs. TomTec: 0.078 and Philips vs. TomTec: 0.025). ICC’s of SRSsept and SSI were higher but only weak (GE vs. TomTec: SRSsept: 0.470, SSI: 0.467) (Philips vs. QLAB: SRSsept: 0.419, SSI: 0.421). Comparability of septal strain patterns was low (Cohen’s kappa, GE vs. TomTec: 0.221 and Philips vs. TomTec: 0.279). Septal strain patterns, SRSsept and SSI were associated with changes in LV end-systolic volume for all vendors. SRSsept and SSI had relative varying C-statistic values (range: 0.530–0.705) and different cut-off values between vendors. CONCLUSIONS: Although global longitudinal strain analysis showed fair comparability, assessment of dyssynchrony parameters was vendor specific and not applicable outside the context of the implemented platform. While the standardization taskforce took an important step for global peak strain, further standardization of STE is still warranted. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12947-017-0116-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5648447/ /pubmed/29047378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12947-017-0116-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
van Everdingen, Wouter M.
Maass, Alexander H.
Vernooy, Kevin
Meine, Mathias
Allaart, Cornelis P.
De Lange, Frederik J.
Teske, Arco J.
Geelhoed, Bastiaan
Rienstra, Michiel
Van Gelder, Isabelle C.
Vos, Marc A.
Cramer, Maarten J.
Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
title Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
title_full Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
title_fullStr Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
title_short Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
title_sort comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5648447/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29047378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12947-017-0116-5
work_keys_str_mv AT vaneverdingenwouterm comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT maassalexanderh comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT vernooykevin comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT meinemathias comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT allaartcornelisp comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT delangefrederikj comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT teskearcoj comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT geelhoedbastiaan comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT rienstramichiel comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT vangelderisabellec comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT vosmarca comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems
AT cramermaartenj comparisonofstrainparametersindyssynchronousheartfailurebetweenspeckletrackingechocardiographyvendorsystems