Key result
LA reservoir strain improves the ASE/EACVI algorithm's diagnostic accuracy for elevated LV filling pressure to 81%.
Why the study?
To investigate whether left atrial reservoir strain offers incremental value to the 2016 ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm for identifying elevated left ventricular filling pressure in patients with preserved ejection fraction.
Does incorporating left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) improve the diagnostic accuracy of the 2016 ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm to identify elevated LV filling pressure in patients with preserved EF?
Observational (n=210)
Yes
Does incorporating left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) improve the diagnostic accuracy of the 2016 ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm to identify elevated LV filling pressure in patients with preserved EF?
Absolute Event Rate: 81% vs 68%
Incorporating left atrial reservoir strain into the 2016 ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm significantly improves its diagnostic accuracy and feasibility for identifying elevated LV filling pressures in patients with preserved EF.
Should not yet change practice; extends the 2016 algorithm but requires prospective validation.
AIMS: This study aimed to investigate the incremental value offered by left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) to the 2016 American Society of Echocardiography/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (ASE/EACVI) diastolic algorithm to identify elevated left ventricular (LV) filling pressure in patients with preserved ejection fraction (EF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Near-simultaneous echocardiography and right heart catheterization were performed in 210 patients with EF ≥50% in a large, dual-centre study. Elevated filling pressure was defined as invasive pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) ≥15 mmHg. LASr was evaluated using speckle-tracking echocardiography. Diagnostic performance of the ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm was validated against invasive reference and compared with modified algorithms incorporating LASr. Modest correlation was observed between E/e', E/A ratio, and LA volume index with PCWP (r = 0.46, 0.46, and 0.36, respectively; P < 0.001 for all). Mitral e' and TR peak velocity showed no association. The ASE/EACVI algorithm (89% feasibility, 71% sensitivity, 68% specificity) demonstrated reasonable ability (AUC = 0.69) and 68% accuracy to identify elevated LV filling pressure. LASr displayed strong ability to identify elevated PCWP (AUC = 0.76). Substituting TR peak velocity for LASr in the algorithm (69% sensitivity, 84% specificity) resulted in 91% feasibility, 81% accuracy, and stronger agreement with invasive measurements. Employing LASr as per expert consensus (71% sensitivity, 70% specificity) and adding LASr to conventional parameters (67% sensitivity, 84% specificity) also demonstrated greater feasibility (98% and 90%, respectively) and overall accuracy (70% and 80%, respectively) to estimate elevated PCWP. CONCLUSIONS: LASr improves feasibility and overall accuracy of the ASE/EACVI algorithm to discern elevated filling pressures in patients with preserved EF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Venkateshvaran et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Elevated left ventricular filling pressure with preserved ejection fraction (n=210). Modified ASE/EACVI algorithm incorporating left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) vs. Standard 2016 ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy for elevated LV filling pressure (PCWP ≥15 mmHg). Incorporating left atrial reservoir strain into the 2016 ASE/EACVI diastolic algorithm improved diagnostic accuracy for identifying elevated LV filling pressure from 68% to 81%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: