Why the study?
Routine evaluation of right ventricular longitudinal strain is supported by large studies but has not yet been adopted in daily clinical practice.
Does right ventricular longitudinal strain (RVLS) assessment improve the detection of RV dysfunction and prediction of adverse outcomes compared to conventional parameters in patients with cardiovascular diseases?
Does right ventricular longitudinal strain (RVLS) assessment improve the detection of RV dysfunction and prediction of adverse outcomes compared to conventional parameters in patients with cardiovascular diseases?
RVLS is a superior imaging marker compared to conventional parameters for detecting subtle RV dysfunction and predicting adverse outcomes in various cardiovascular diseases, supporting its routine clinical evaluation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
RV longitudinal strain may enhance risk stratification beyond conventional measures; leaves open its routine adoption pending prospective validation.
Right ventricular (RV) systolic function represents an important independent predictor of adverse outcomes in many cardiovascular (CV) diseases. However, conventional parameters of RV systolic function (tricuspid annular plane excursion (TAPSE), RV myocardial performance index (MPI), and fractional area change (FAC)) are not always able to detect subtle changes in RV function. New evidence indicates a significantly higher predictive value of RV longitudinal strain (LS) over conventional parameters. RVLS showed higher sensitivity and specificity in the detection of RV dysfunction in the absence of RV dilatation, apparent wall motion abnormalities, and reduced global RV systolic function. Additionally, RVLS represents a significant and independent predictor of adverse outcomes in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (CMP), hypertrophic CMP, arrhythmogenic RV CMP, and amyloidosis, but also in patients with connective tissue diseases and patients with coronary artery disease. Due to its availability, echocardiography remains the main imaging tool for RVLS assessment, but cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) also represents an important additional imaging tool in RVLG assessment. The findings from the large studies support the routine evaluation of RVLS in the majority of CV patients, but this has still not been adopted in daily clinical practice. This clinical review aims to summarize the significance and predictive value of RVLS in patients with different types of cardiomyopathies, tissue connective diseases, and coronary artery disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tadić et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: