Cargando…
Right ventricular longitudinal fractional shortening: a substitute to right ventricular free wall longitudinal strain?
Purpose: Because of its diagnostic and prognostic value, right ventricular strain assessed by speckle-tracking imaging (RVS) has been incorporated into echocardiographic guidelines. However, it suffers from limitations including the need of good image quality and of dedicated software with inter-ven...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Japan
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8369863/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34402942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00380-021-01928-6 |
Sumario: | Purpose: Because of its diagnostic and prognostic value, right ventricular strain assessed by speckle-tracking imaging (RVS) has been incorporated into echocardiographic guidelines. However, it suffers from limitations including the need of good image quality and of dedicated software with inter-vendor variability. We hypothesized that RV free wall longitudinal fractional shortening (LFS) could be used as a substitute to RVS, without suffering from the aforementioned limitations. Methods: We aimed to establish in a series of non-selected consecutive patients in sinus rhythm the value of LFS, calculated as [-(TAPSE/RVdiastolic length)] and of several common echocardiographic and Doppler parameters to predict an abnormal RV function, defined as RVS > − 20.2%. Results: Among 144 consecutive patients, poor image quality precluded the assessment of RVS and of LFS in 31 and 4 patients, respectively (P = 0.0018), resulting in a final study group of 113 patients. The intraclass correlation coefficients for inter- and intra-observer variability were 0.97 (95% CI 0.92; 0.98) and 0.93 (CI 0.92; 0.98) for LFS and RVS, respectively. Among all tested RV function indices, LFS best correlated with RVS (R 0.97, 95% CI 0.81; 0.91). Bland–Altman analysis for the comparison between LFS and RVS showed no systematic bias. The area under the ROC-curve of the various RV function indices to detect abnormal RVS was best for LFS (0.97, 95% CI 0.94–1), with sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive value of 83%, 96%, 96%, and 83%, respectively. Conclusion: LFS performs reasonably well to predict abnormal RVS and is more often feasible than RVS. |
---|