Key result
Semiquantitative relative apical sparing improves cardiac amyloidosis discrimination over visual assessment to AUC 0.74.
Why the study?
Visual assessment of the relative apical sparing pattern of LV longitudinal strain is inconsistent and quantitative assessment is time-consuming for identifying cardiac amyloidosis.
Does semiquantitative assessment of RASP improve the identification of cardiac amyloidosis compared to visual assessment in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy?
Case-Control (n=120)
Does semiquantitative assessment of RASP improve the identification of cardiac amyloidosis compared to visual assessment in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.74% vs 0.65%
Semiquantitative assessment of the relative apical sparing pattern is a reproducible and accurate method for identifying cardiac amyloidosis in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy.
Semiquantitative relative apical sparing assessment may aid cardiac amyloidosis detection in LVH; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUNDS: The relative apical sparing pattern (RASP) of left ventricular (LV) longitudinal strain (LS) is frequently associated with cardiac amyloidosis (CA). However, the visual assessment of RASP is inconsistent, and the quantitative assessment of RASP is time-consuming. This study aimed to compare assessments of RASP for the identification of CA with conventional assessments and investigate their reproducibility and relevance on the assessments. METHODS: Forty patients with biopsy-proven CA were compared with 80 hypertrophied patients matched for mean LV wall thickness. We compared the discriminative abilities of three assessments of RASP to identify CA (visual, quantitative, and semiquantitative). Nine patterns of semiquantitative RASP were investigated; finally, it was defined as "reduction of LS" (≥ -10%) in ≥5 (of 6) basal segments, relative to "preserved LS" (< -15%) in at least one apical segment. RESULTS: The concordance between the two observers for visual RASP was modest (κ = 0.65). On the other hand, the consistency for semiquantitative RASP was perfect (κ = 1.00). The discriminative ability of semiquantitative RASP (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.74) was significantly better than that of visual RASP (AUC = 0.65) and equivalent to that of binary quantitative RASP. CONCLUSION: Semiquantitative RASP assessment is reproducible and accurately discriminates CA. This simple assessment may help readily refine the risk stratification of patients with diffuse LV hypertrophy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saito et al. (2020) conducted a case-control in Cardiac amyloidosis (n=120). Semiquantitative assessment of relative apical sparing pattern (RASP) vs. Visual assessment of RASP was evaluated on Discriminative ability to identify cardiac amyloidosis (Area Under the Curve). Semiquantitative assessment of the relative apical sparing pattern accurately discriminated cardiac amyloidosis (AUC 0.74), performing significantly better than visual assessment (AUC 0.65).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: