Key result
Tissue Doppler Tei index correlated with flow Doppler Tei index only in the sitting position (r = 0.406, P = 0.003) and does not appear to be a suitable substitute for flow Doppler.
Why the study?
Does tissue Doppler Tei index correlate with flow Doppler Tei index in healthy subjects and hypertensive patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=51)
Does tissue Doppler Tei index correlate with flow Doppler Tei index in healthy subjects and hypertensive patients?
Effect estimate: r = 0.406
p-value: p=0.003
Tissue Doppler Tei index is not a suitable substitute for flow Doppler Tei index, and the latter is preload dependent, requiring consideration of loading status during evaluation.
Tissue Doppler Tei index shows poor agreement with flow Doppler; leaves open its reliability for myocardial performance assessment across preload states.
BACKGROUND: It is still unknown whether a correlation exists between left ventricular Tei index obtained by tissue Doppler imaging and that determined by flow Doppler waveforms. This study was conducted to evaluate their relationship and to assess the positional effect on them. METHODS: Twenty-six healthy subjects and 25 patients with essential hypertension were included. On the tissue Doppler images, the time interval from the end to the onset of the mitral annular velocity pattern during diastole and the duration of the S-wave were used to calculate tissue Doppler Tei index. RESULTS: The tissue Doppler Tei index correlated with the flow Doppler Tei index at sitting position (r = 0.406, P = 0.003), but not at left lateral decubitus position. The limits of agreement for the Tei index measured by both methods were -0.26 to 0.62 at left lateral decubitus position and -0.09 to 0.55 at sitting position. Preload reduction associated with sitting position with dangling feet raised the Tei index both in the healthy controls [0.54 (0.14) vs 0.42 (0.12), P < 0.001] and in the hypertensives [0.53 (0.15) vs 0.46 (0.12), P = 0.005]. There was a similar positional effect on the tissue Doppler Tei index in the control subjects [0.75 (0.12) vs 0.53 (0.10), P < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Tissue Doppler Tei index does not seem to be a suitable substitute for flow Doppler Tei index. Flow Doppler Tei index is preload dependent and the loading status should be taken into consideration at the application of Tei index to the evaluation of myocardial performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Voon et al. (2005) conducted a cross-sectional in Essential hypertension and healthy subjects (n=51). Tissue Doppler imaging vs. Flow Doppler imaging was evaluated on Correlation between tissue Doppler Tei index and flow Doppler Tei index at sitting position (r = 0.406, p=0.003). Tissue Doppler Tei index correlated with flow Doppler Tei index only in the sitting position (r = 0.406, P = 0.003) and does not appear to be a suitable substitute for flow Doppler.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: