Left and right atrial speckle tracking: Comparison of three methods of time reference gating.
LA booster strain
LA conduit strain
LA reservoir strain
P-P gating
R-R gating
volume gating
Journal
Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.)
ISSN: 1540-8175
Titre abrégé: Echocardiography
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8511187
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
09
12
2019
revised:
19
05
2020
accepted:
27
05
2020
pubmed:
21
6
2020
medline:
24
6
2021
entrez:
21
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Atrial function has a close interdependence with ventricular function and plays a central role in maintaining optimal cardiac function. There are two well-defined timing methods used to determine the start point. The aim of this prospective study was to objectively assess the influence of gating method selection on reported left and right strain values within the same group of healthy subjects. 101 volunteers (44 male, 57 female) had adequate tracking for analysis on TomTec Imaging Systems (Unterschleissheim, Germany). The median age was 41 years (range 19-79 years, interquartile range 30-52 years). Atrial strain by 2D-speckle tracking echocardiography was evaluated using two commonly applied zero baseline time reference methods: R-R gating and P-P gating, in addition to volume gating (defining end-systole at the atrial maximum and end-diastole at the atrial minimum). True atrial minimum occurred prior to the onset of the QRS in most healthy volunteers. There was a significant difference for LA and RA reservoir strain between volume gating and R-R gating (mean difference, 4.63%; P < .001 for LA; mean difference, 4.23%; P < .001 for RA), as well as volume gating and P-P gating (mean difference, 5.26%; P < .001 for LA; mean difference, 6.24%; P < .001 for RA). Noticeably, reservoir strain was comparable between R-R gating and P-P gating (mean difference, 0.58%, P = .06) in LA, but not on RA (mean difference, 2.02%, P < .001). There was variability in atrial strain values depending on the zero baseline time reference method used.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Atrial function has a close interdependence with ventricular function and plays a central role in maintaining optimal cardiac function. There are two well-defined timing methods used to determine the start point. The aim of this prospective study was to objectively assess the influence of gating method selection on reported left and right strain values within the same group of healthy subjects.
METHODS
101 volunteers (44 male, 57 female) had adequate tracking for analysis on TomTec Imaging Systems (Unterschleissheim, Germany). The median age was 41 years (range 19-79 years, interquartile range 30-52 years). Atrial strain by 2D-speckle tracking echocardiography was evaluated using two commonly applied zero baseline time reference methods: R-R gating and P-P gating, in addition to volume gating (defining end-systole at the atrial maximum and end-diastole at the atrial minimum).
RESULTS
True atrial minimum occurred prior to the onset of the QRS in most healthy volunteers. There was a significant difference for LA and RA reservoir strain between volume gating and R-R gating (mean difference, 4.63%; P < .001 for LA; mean difference, 4.23%; P < .001 for RA), as well as volume gating and P-P gating (mean difference, 5.26%; P < .001 for LA; mean difference, 6.24%; P < .001 for RA). Noticeably, reservoir strain was comparable between R-R gating and P-P gating (mean difference, 0.58%, P = .06) in LA, but not on RA (mean difference, 2.02%, P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
There was variability in atrial strain values depending on the zero baseline time reference method used.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1021-1029Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Santos ABS, Roca GQ, Claggett B, et al. Prognostic relevance of left atrial dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circ: Heart Fail. 2016;9(4):e002763-e.
Cameli M, Lisi M, Focardi M, et al. Left atrial deformation analysis by speckle tracking echocardiography for prediction of cardiovascular outcomes. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110(2):264-269.
Galli E, Fournet M, Chabanne C, et al. Prognostic value of left atrial reservoir function in patients with severe aortic stenosis: a 2D speckle-tracking echocardiographic study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;17(5):533-541.
Sarvari SI, Haugaa KH, Stokke TM, et al. Strain echocardiographic assessment of left atrial function predicts recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;17(6):660-667.
Bhave NM, Visovatti SH, Kulick B, Kolias TJ, McLaughlin VV. Right atrial strain is predictive of clinical outcomes and invasive hemodynamic data in group 1 pulmonary arterial hypertension. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;33(6):847-855.
Saha SK, Soderberg S, Lindqvist P. Association of right atrial mechanics with hemodynamics and physical capacity in patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension: insight from a single-center cohort in Northern Sweden. Echocardiography. 2016;33(1):46-56.
Hoit BD. Left atrial size and function: role in prognosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(6):493-505.
Donal E, Behagel A, Feneon D. Value of left atrial strain: a highly promising field of investigation. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16(4):356-357.
Badano LP, Kolias TJ, Muraru D, et al. Standardization of left atrial, right ventricular, and right atrial deformation imaging using two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography: a consensus document of the EACVI/ASE/Industry Task Force to standardize deformation imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;19(6):591-600.
Truong VT, Palmer C, Wolking S, et al. Normal left atrial strain and strain rate using cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking in healthy volunteers. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020.21(4):446-453.
Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015;28(1):1-39.e14.
Nagueh SF, Smiseth OA, Appleton CP, et al. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2016;29(4):277-314.
Carluccio E, Biagioli P, Mengoni A, et al. Atrial reservoir function and outcome in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Circ: Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11(11):e007696.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet (London, England). 1986;1(8476):307-310.
Vieira MJ, Teixeira R, Goncalves L, Gersh BJ. Left atrial mechanics: echocardiographic assessment and clinical implications. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014;27(5):463-478.
Gan GCH, Ferkh A, Boyd A, Thomas L. Left atrial function: evaluation by strain analysis. Cardiovasc Diagnosis Therapy. 2018;8(1):29-46.
Pathan F, D'Elia N, Nolan MT, Marwick TH, Negishi K. Normal ranges of left atrial strain by speckle-tracking echocardiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2017;30(1):59-70.e8.
Liao JN, Chao TF, Kuo JY, et al. Age, sex, and blood pressure-related influences on reference values of left atrial deformation and mechanics from a large-scale Asian population. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10(10):e006077.
Zaki R, Bulgiba A, Ismail R, Ismail NA. Statistical methods used to test for agreement of medical instruments measuring continuous variables in method comparison studies: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37908.
Stolarova M, Wolf C, Rinker T, Brielmann A. How to assess and compare inter-rater reliability, agreement and correlation of ratings: an exemplary analysis of mother-father and parent-teacher expressive vocabulary rating pairs. Front Psychol. 2014;5:509.