Key result
GLS correlates more strongly with LVEF than twist or torsion.
Why the study?
Direct comparison of correlations between global longitudinal strain, twist, and torsion with left ventricular ejection fraction has never been done before.
Does global longitudinal strain correlate better with left ventricular ejection fraction than left ventricular twist and torsion?
Cross-Sectional (n=131)
Does global longitudinal strain correlate better with left ventricular ejection fraction than left ventricular twist and torsion?
Effect estimate: r = 0.95
p-value: p=< 0.001
Global longitudinal strain correlates more strongly with left ventricular ejection fraction than twist or torsion, particularly in patients with systolic dysfunction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports GLS for LVEF correlation in systolic dysfunction; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Lima et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Normal or impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (n=131). Global longitudinal strain (GLS) vs. Twist and torsion was evaluated on Correlation with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (r = 0.95, p=< 0.001). Global longitudinal strain showed a stronger correlation with left ventricular ejection fraction (r=0.95, P<0.001) compared to twist (r=0.78) and torsion (r=0.75).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: