Why the study?
LAVI has suboptimal correlation with invasive LVFP, and incorporating left atrial reservoir strain may improve diastolic assessment.
Does left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) improve the accuracy of predicting invasive left ventricular filling pressure compared to left atrial volume index (LAVI) in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization?
Does left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) improve the accuracy of predicting invasive left ventricular filling pressure compared to left atrial volume index (LAVI) in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization?
Left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) provides superior prediction of invasive left ventricular filling pressure compared to left atrial volume index (LAVI), and its incorporation into the 2016 diastology algorithm improves diagnostic accuracy.
BACKGROUND: Left atrial analysis is employed in diastolic assessment with left atrial volume index (LAVI) incorporated in the 2016 ASE/EACVI diastology guideline algorithm. LAVI has sub-optimal correlation with invasive left ventricular filling pressure (LVFP) and incorporation of left atrial reservoir strain (LASr) may improve diastolic assessment. METHODS: A cross-sectional prospective study of 139 patients was undertaken with all patients undergoing transthoracic echocardiography immediately prior to cardiac catheterization with invasive evaluation of LVFP. LASr by speckle tracking echocardiography and conventional echocardiographic parameters were assessed in relation to invasive LVFP. Modification of the 2016 guideline algorithm was performed with incorporation of LASr in place of LAVI (LASr ≤23% indicating elevated LVFP). Accuracy of the modified and conventional algorithm were assessed for predicting invasive LVFP. RESULTS: The mean age was 63±12 years with 27% female. LASr demonstrated superior correlation and receiver operator characteristic for predicting LVFP than LAVI (LASr: r -.46 (p < 0.01), AUC: .82 vs LAVI: r .19 (p 0.02), AUC: .66). LASr of ≤23% was the optimal cut-off for discriminating elevated LVFP (sensitivity 80%, specificity 77%). Modification of the 2016 algorithm with incorporation of LASr in place of LAVI reclassified 12% of the patient cohort and improved concordance of echocardiographic and invasive LVFP assessment (modified algorithm κ .47 vs 2016 algorithm κ: .33). No patients were incorrectly reclassified by modified algorithm assessment. CONCLUSIONS: LASr better predicts invasive LVFP than LAVI. Modification of the 2016 guideline algorithm with incorporation of LASr in place of LAVI improves accuracy of echocardiographic assessment of LVFP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tomlinson et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: