Left Ventricular Systolic Impairment after Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Assessed by STE Analysis.
cardiac surgery
congenital heart disease
echocardiography
speckle tracking echocardiography
Journal
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2227-9032
Titre abrégé: Healthcare (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101666525
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Oct 2021
09 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
18
07
2021
revised:
27
09
2021
accepted:
05
10
2021
entrez:
23
10
2021
pubmed:
24
10
2021
medline:
24
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) has gained increasing value in the evaluation of congenital heart diseases (CHD); however, its use in pediatric cardiac surgery is limited. To evaluate left ventricular (LV) systolic impairment after biventricular pediatric cardiac surgery by STE strain (ε) analysis. We prospectively enrolled 117 children undergoing cardiac surgery for CHD. Echocardiography was performed at four different times: pre-operatively, 12-36 h (Time 1), 3-5 days (Time 2), and 6-8 days (Time 3). Images were obtained in the 4-2-and 3 apical chamber's views to derive LV global and regional (basal/mid/apical) ε values. At different postoperative times, we performed 320 examinations in 117 children (mean age: 2.4 ± 3.9, range: 0-16 years); 117 age-matched healthy children served as controls. All global, basal, and mid LVε values decreased after surgery; the lowest values being at Time 1 ( STE ε analysis revealed a significant LV systolic impairment after surgery with amelioration thereafter but incomplete normalization at discharge. Base-apex differences emerged with apical segments that, contrary to all the other regions, showed relative hypercontractility after surgery. The slower recovery of LVε values compared to LVEF suggests that STE ε analysis may be more accurate for the follow-up of mild LV post-surgical impairment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) has gained increasing value in the evaluation of congenital heart diseases (CHD); however, its use in pediatric cardiac surgery is limited.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate left ventricular (LV) systolic impairment after biventricular pediatric cardiac surgery by STE strain (ε) analysis.
METHODS
METHODS
We prospectively enrolled 117 children undergoing cardiac surgery for CHD. Echocardiography was performed at four different times: pre-operatively, 12-36 h (Time 1), 3-5 days (Time 2), and 6-8 days (Time 3). Images were obtained in the 4-2-and 3 apical chamber's views to derive LV global and regional (basal/mid/apical) ε values.
RESULTS
RESULTS
At different postoperative times, we performed 320 examinations in 117 children (mean age: 2.4 ± 3.9, range: 0-16 years); 117 age-matched healthy children served as controls. All global, basal, and mid LVε values decreased after surgery; the lowest values being at Time 1 (
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
STE ε analysis revealed a significant LV systolic impairment after surgery with amelioration thereafter but incomplete normalization at discharge. Base-apex differences emerged with apical segments that, contrary to all the other regions, showed relative hypercontractility after surgery. The slower recovery of LVε values compared to LVEF suggests that STE ε analysis may be more accurate for the follow-up of mild LV post-surgical impairment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34683018
pii: healthcare9101338
doi: 10.3390/healthcare9101338
pmc: PMC8544436
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : T32 GM136577
Pays : United States
Références
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2008 Nov;21(11):1207-15
pubmed: 18992672
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 May;147(5):1561-7
pubmed: 24035382
J Echocardiogr. 2019 Mar;17(1):10-16
pubmed: 30390189
Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2017 Mar;110(3):157-166
pubmed: 28034627
Eur Heart J. 2016 Jul 14;37(27):2129-2200
pubmed: 27206819
J Tehran Heart Cent. 2018 Jan;13(1):18-23
pubmed: 29997666
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014 May;27(5):549-60, e3
pubmed: 24582163
Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2019 Sep 2;17(1):18
pubmed: 31477137
Pediatr Cardiol. 2016 Feb;37(2):271-7
pubmed: 26424215
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013 Aug;26(8):853-9
pubmed: 23791113
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2015 Oct;53(11):1839-46
pubmed: 25901715
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013 Apr;26(4):398-409.e2
pubmed: 23337737
Perfusion. 2014 Sep;29(5):425-33
pubmed: 24304544
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2020 Mar;33(3):368-377
pubmed: 31866322
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Aug;95(31):e4426
pubmed: 27495064
Br J Anaesth. 2019 Apr;122(4):428-436
pubmed: 30857599
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Mar;16(3):233-70
pubmed: 25712077
Pediatr Cardiol. 2019 Feb;40(2):366-373
pubmed: 30413855
Echocardiography. 2017 Mar;34(3):446-452
pubmed: 28168740
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Jan;16(1):1-11
pubmed: 25525063
Anesth Analg. 2019 May;128(5):854-864
pubmed: 30896605
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2018 Jun;31(6):712-720.e6
pubmed: 29526564
Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2016 Nov;109(11):599-606
pubmed: 27692659
Congenit Heart Dis. 2016 Mar-Apr;11(2):199-207
pubmed: 26879728
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011 Jun;24(6):625-36
pubmed: 21392941
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2013 Aug;44(2):269-74
pubmed: 23407159