Key result
A scoring system incorporating medical history and echocardiographic parameters predicted low global longitudinal strain (<16%) with 80.3% sensitivity and 76.5% specificity in patients with preclinical heart failure.
This editorial discusses the importance of identifying left ventricular abnormalities using global longitudinal strain in patients with preclinical heart failure (Stages A and B).
individuals at risk of HF (Stage A) or with pre-HF (Stage B).Identifying left ventricular (LV) abnormalities is imperative in patients with preclinical HF, and global longitudinal strain (GLS) is a sensitive marker of subtle LV functional abnormalities.Current guidelines stipulate that a GLS <16% should be construed as an LV structural abnormality.2-4 Indeed, the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the management of HF 2 recommends thresholds, H eart failure (HF) is categorized into stages A-D based on structural changes and symptomatic manifestations, 1 and this classification not only provides information on the progression of the disease but also can help elucidate the characteristics of individuals and populations.Stages A and B include patients without clinical symptoms; thus both are denoted as preclinical HF.The 2022 American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) Guideline for the management of HF 2 emphasizes the significance of primary prevention for Article p ????The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the editors or of the Japanese Circulation Society.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yasuharu Takeda (2024) conducted an editorial in Preclinical Heart Failure (n=853). Clinical and echocardiographic scoring system was evaluated on Prediction of low global longitudinal strain (GLS <16%). A scoring system incorporating medical history and echocardiographic parameters predicted low global longitudinal strain (<16%) with 80.3% sensitivity and 76.5% specificity in patients with preclinical heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: