Why the study?
Does the Tei index of myocardial performance predict long-term cardiac events in patients following acute myocardial infarction?
Does the Tei index of myocardial performance predict long-term cardiac events in patients following acute myocardial infarction?
The Tei index of myocardial performance is a useful echocardiographic tool for long-term risk assessment in patients following acute myocardial infarction, even with preserved systolic function.
BACKGROUND: The Tei index of myocardial performance (IMP), which combines parameters of both systolic and diastolic ventricular function, is a useful prognostic factor in many clinical settings. HYPOTHESIS: This study assessed the long-term prognostic value of IMP in patients discharged from hospital after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: Doppler/echocardiographic studies were recorded in 90 consecutive patients on Day 14 +/- 2 following an AMI. The IMP was calculated from the Doppler recordings, as a sum of isovolumetric contraction time and isovolumetric relaxation time, divided by the ejection time. RESULTS: The patients were followed for an average (SD) of 57.8 (16.1) months. During this period there were 22 (24%) cardiac events, defined as cardiac deaths (10) or nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarctions (12). After multivariate Cox analysis, Tei index > 0.55 (relative risk [RR] 4.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-15.45; p = 0.019), LV end-systolic volume > 65 ml (RR 3.23; 95% CI 1.34-7.79; p = 0.009), and mitral E wave deceleration time < or = 0.145 s (RR 2.94; 95% CI 1.24-6.92; p = 0.014) were the only independent predictors of cardiac events during the follow-up period. In a subgroup of patients with preserved LV systolic function (ejection fraction > 0.40), IMP was the only predictor of cardiac events (RR 6.37; 95% CI 1.32-30.77, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The Tei index of myocardial performance, which is simple and easy to calculate, is a useful tool for risk assessment in patients following myocardial infarction, and in a subgroup of patients with normal or only mildly impaired systolic function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Szymański et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: