Key result
Adding LV early diastolic strain rate to standard evaluation increases diastolic dysfunction detection by ~132%.
Why the study?
Does left ventricular early diastolic strain rate (LVSRe) improve the detection of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and predict clinical outcomes in patients with preserved LVEF?
Observational (n=852)
Yes
Does left ventricular early diastolic strain rate (LVSRe) improve the detection of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and predict clinical outcomes in patients with preserved LVEF?
Left ventricular early diastolic strain rate (LVSRe) improves the detection of diastolic dysfunction and is a strong predictor of heart failure hospitalization in patients with preserved ejection fraction.
May aid LVDD detection in preserved LVEF; leaves open whether routine use improves outcomes or warrants practice change.
Aims: The aim of the present study was to determine the lower limit of normality and the clinical relevance of left ventricular (LV) early diastolic strain rate (LVSRe) for the detection of LV diastolic dysfunction (LVDD). Methods and results: Using 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography, we analysed 377 healthy subjects and 475 patients with risk for LVDD with preserved LV ejection fraction (LVEF). The normal range of LVSRe analysing the healthy subjects was 1.56 ± 0.28 s-1, with a lower limit of normality at 1.00 s-1. Using this cut-off, LVSRe was able to detect high rates of LV diastolic alterations (rate 71.1%), which was significantly better than using indirect diastolic parameters such as left atrial volume index (LAVI) and tricuspid regurgitation velocity (TR) (rates 22.9% and 9.1%) and similar to annular mitral parameters such as lateral and septal e' velocity (rates 70.9% and 72.4%). In line, adding LVSRe to the current evaluation of LVDD increased significantly the rate of detection of LVDD (absolute rate of increase 18.9%; rate of detection of LVDD: from 14.3% to 33.2%, P < 0.01). Regarding the clinical relevance of LVSRe, patients with abnormal LVSRe (i.e. <1.00 s-1) had significantly worse New York Heart Association functional class and symptomatic status than those with normal LVSRe. In addition, in a retrospective post hoc analysis, we found that an abnormal LVSRe had a significant association with the risk of heart failure hospitalization at 2 years (odds ratio 5.0, 95% confidence interval 1.3-18.4), which was better than using conventional diastolic parameters such as septal and lateral e' velocity, LAVI and TR velocity. Conclusion: The findings from this multicentre study provide important data regarding the normal range of LVSRe and highlight the potential clinical relevance of using this new diastolic parameter in the detection of LVDD in patients with preserved LVEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morris et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (n=852). Left ventricular early diastolic strain rate (LVSRe) vs. Current evaluation without LVSRe was evaluated on Detection of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (p=<0.01). Adding left ventricular early diastolic strain rate to current evaluation significantly increased the detection of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction from 14.3% to 33.2% (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: