Improving performance of 3D speckle tracking in arterial hypertension and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation by using novel strain parameters.
Adult
Aged
Asymptomatic Diseases
Atrial Fibrillation
/ diagnosis
Atrial Function, Left
/ physiology
Atrial Remodeling
/ physiology
Case-Control Studies
Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional
Female
Heart Atria
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Hypertension
/ complications
Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular
/ diagnosis
Male
Middle Aged
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 05 2019
14 05 2019
Historique:
received:
24
07
2018
accepted:
30
04
2019
entrez:
16
5
2019
pubmed:
16
5
2019
medline:
22
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The function of left atrium (LA) is closely related to LA remodeling and one of the most important mechanisms is an increased deposition of fibrous tissue that often is the basis for LA electro-mechanical changes before the onset of atrial fibrillation (AF). This study evaluated LA shape and function, by investigating standard and novel strain parameters calculated by a new approach based on homologous times derived from 3D speckle tracking echocardiography (3DSTE) in hypertensive (HT) and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) patients with or without left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), compared to control (C) subjects. LA function was assessed using homologous times to compare strain variables among different individuals, acquired at different physiological time periods. Standard global longitudinal (GLS) and circumferential (GCS) strains were measured at peak of atrial diastole, while longitudinal and circumferential strains (GLSh, GCSh), strain rate (GLSr, GCSr), volume (Vh) and volume rate (Vr) were measured during the atrial telediastolic phase (fifth homologous time) and atrial pre-active phase (tenth homologous time). Using ANOVA, we found an impaired LA deformation detected by standard, interpolated strains and strain rates in both HT and PAF groups compared to C. We also performed ROC analysis to identify different performances of each parameter to discriminate groups (GLSr10 + GCSr10: C vs PAF 0.935; C vs PAF_LVH 0.924; C vs HT_LVH 0.844; C vs HT 0.756). Our study showed anatomical and functional LA remodeling in patients with PAF and HT. 3D strains and strain rates derived from the homologous times approach provide more functional information with improved performance to identify among the explored groups, in particular PAF patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31089252
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-43855-7
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-43855-7
pmc: PMC6517438
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7382Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Jan 1;51(1):1-11
pubmed: 18174029
Eur Heart J. 2008 Jun;29(11):1397-409
pubmed: 18436560
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2010 Mar;135 Suppl 2:S21-5
pubmed: 20221974
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Jul;15(7):793-9
pubmed: 24480243
Sci Rep. 2016 Oct 07;6:34906
pubmed: 27713503
Am J Med. 2006 May;119(5):448.e1-19
pubmed: 16651058
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2015 Mar;53(3):263-73
pubmed: 25466224
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2019 Apr;20(4):169-179
pubmed: 30829875
Circ Res. 2018 Jan 19;122(2):352-368
pubmed: 29348255
N Engl J Med. 2014 Jun 26;370(26):2478-86
pubmed: 24963567
JAMA. 2001 May 9;285(18):2370-5
pubmed: 11343485
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002 Nov 6;40(9):1636-44
pubmed: 12427417
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 13;10(4):e0122376
pubmed: 25875818
Eur Heart J. 2014 Jun 7;35(22):1457-65
pubmed: 24302269
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Feb 26;51(8):802-9
pubmed: 18294563
Cardiovasc Res. 2002 May;54(2):230-46
pubmed: 12062329
Heart. 2001 Nov;86(5):516-21
pubmed: 11602543
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Dec 2;64(21):e1-76
pubmed: 24685669
Am J Cardiol. 2017 May 15;119(10):1687-1693
pubmed: 28363352
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Oct;6(10):1025-1035
pubmed: 24011776
Mayo Clin Proc. 2001 May;76(5):467-75
pubmed: 11357793
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Jan 4;45(1):87-92
pubmed: 15629380
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2005 Jul;18(7):729-36
pubmed: 16003270
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Feb 18;63(6):493-505
pubmed: 24291276
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Jul;9(7):
pubmed: 27412658
Eur Heart J. 2016 Oct 7;37(38):2893-2962
pubmed: 27567408
Front Physiol. 2017 Feb 14;8:68
pubmed: 28261103
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Feb;8(2):e002769
pubmed: 25652181
Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2012 Feb 01;10:4
pubmed: 22296702
Circulation. 2006 Jul 11;114(2):119-25
pubmed: 16818816
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Aug;5(8):769-77
pubmed: 22897989
J Cardiol. 2014 Apr;63(4):291-5
pubmed: 24182422
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 23;9(1):e86896
pubmed: 24466282
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Sep 1;19(9):1002-1009
pubmed: 29659784
Circulation. 1997 Aug 19;96(4):1180-4
pubmed: 9286947
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013 Feb;26(2):165-74
pubmed: 23140846
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010 May;3(3):231-9
pubmed: 20133512
Hypertension. 2010 May;55(5):1150-6
pubmed: 20368506
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jan 12;366(2):120-9
pubmed: 22236222
Echocardiography. 2013 Oct;30(9):1078-83
pubmed: 23659362
Clin Res Cardiol. 2016 Jan;105(1):17-28
pubmed: 26123829
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Jan;18(1):46-53
pubmed: 26976357