Key result
Velocity tracking (PSV+E) demonstrated 85% sensitivity and 60% specificity for detecting ischaemia, compared to 75% and 40% respectively for expert wall motion scoring.
Why the study?
Does velocity tracking accurately detect ischemia in NSTEMI patients compared to expert wall motion scoring and bedside echocardiography?
Cross-Sectional (n=30)
Does velocity tracking accurately detect ischemia in NSTEMI patients compared to expert wall motion scoring and bedside echocardiography?
Velocity tracking is a promising, user-independent echocardiographic method that may offer improved sensitivity and specificity for detecting ischemia in NSTEMI patients compared to traditional wall motion scoring.
BACKGROUND: The use of two-dimensional echocardiography (2D echo) for detection of ischaemia is limited due to high user dependency. Longitudinal motion is sensitive for ischaemia and usable for quantitative measurement of longitudinal myocardial function but time consuming. Velocity tracking (VeT) is a new method that gives an easy three-dimensional understanding of both systolic and diastolic regional motion, using colour coded bull's eye presentation of longitudinal velocity, derived from colour coded tissue Doppler. The aim of this study was to test the accuracy of VeT in detecting ischaemia in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients bedside. METHODS: Twenty patients with NSTEMI and 10 controls were included. Echocardiography was performed within 24 h of symptoms and prior to coronary angiography. Bull's eye plots presenting the peak systolic velocity (PSV) and the sum of PSV and the E-wave-velocity (PSV+E) were created using our developed software. VeT was compared to expert wall motion scoring (WMS) and bedside echo. We used the clinical conclusion based on ECG, angiography and clinical picture as 'gold standard'. RESULTS: Sensitivity for ischaemia with VeT (PSV+E) was 85% and specificity 60%. The corresponding sensitivities for expert WMS were 75% (specificity 40%). For regional analysis VeT and WMS showed comparable results with correct regional outcome in 11/20 of patients both superior to bedside echo. CONCLUSION: Velocity tracking is a promising technique that provides an easily understandable three-dimensional bull's eye plot for assessment of regional left ventricular longitudinal velocity with great potential for detection of regional dysfunction and myocardial ischaemia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Westholm et al. (2008) conducted a cross-sectional in Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) (n=30). Velocity tracking (VeT) vs. Expert wall motion scoring (WMS) and bedside echo was evaluated on Sensitivity for detecting ischaemia. Velocity tracking (PSV+E) demonstrated 85% sensitivity and 60% specificity for detecting ischaemia, compared to 75% and 40% respectively for expert wall motion scoring.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: