Variability and Reproducibility of Segmental Longitudinal Strain Measurement
| Autor: | Oana Mirea, Efstathios D. Pagourelias, Jurgen Duchenne, Jan Bogaert, James D. Thomas, Luigi P. Badano, Jens-Uwe Voigt, Jamie Hamilton, Stefano Pedri, Peter Lysyansky, Gunnar Hansen, Yasuhiro Ito, Tomoaki Chono, Jane Vogel, David Prater, Sungwook Park, Jin Yong Lee, Helene Houle, Bogdan Georgescu, Rolf Baumann, Bernhard Mumm, Yashuhiko Abe, Willem Gorissen |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Lv function
Reproducibility Longitudinal strain Strain (chemistry) business.industry Task force Ultrasound 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Strain pattern Sonographer Medicine Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging 030212 general & internal medicine Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine business Nuclear medicine |
| Zdroj: | JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 11:15-24 |
| ISSN: | 1936-878X |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.01.027 |
| Popis: | Objectives In this study, we compared left ventricular (LV) segmental strain measurements obtained with different ultrasound machines and post-processing software packages. Background Global longitudinal strain (GLS) has proven to be a reproducible and valuable tool in clinical practice. Data about the reproducibility and intervendor differences of segmental strain measurements, however, are missing. Methods We included 63 volunteers with cardiac magnetic resonance–proven infarct scar with segmental LV function ranging from normal to severely impaired. Each subject was examined within 2 h by a single expert sonographer with machines from multiple vendors. All 3 apical views were acquired twice to determine the test-retest and the intervendor variability. Segmental longitudinal peak systolic, end-systolic, and post-systolic strain were measured using 7 vendor-specific systems (Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan; Esaote, Florence, Italy; GE Vingmed Ultrasound, Horten, Norway; Philips, Andover, Massachusetts; Samsung, Seoul, South Korea; Siemens, Mountain View, California; and Toshiba, Otawara, Japan) and 2 independent software packages (Epsilon, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and TOMTEC, Unterschleissheim, Germany) and compared among vendors. Results Image quality and tracking feasibility differed among vendors (analysis of variance, p Conclusions In contrast to GLS, LV segmental longitudinal strain measurements have a higher variability on top of the known intervendor bias. The fidelity of different software to follow segmental function varies considerably. We conclude that single segmental strain values should be used with caution in the clinic. Segmental strain pattern analysis might be a more robust alternative. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|