Key result
Indexed LA volume outperforms LA area and diameter for predicting CV events with ~0.71 AUC.
Why the study?
The incremental value of left atrial volume compared with left atrial area or diameter as a cardiovascular risk marker had not been prospectively evaluated in patients with sinus rhythm or AF.
Does biplane left atrial volume improve the prediction of combined adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared to left atrial area and M-mode diameter in patients with sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=423)
Does biplane left atrial volume improve the prediction of combined adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared to left atrial area and M-mode diameter in patients with sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation?
Indexed left atrial volume is a superior predictor of adverse cardiovascular events compared to left atrial area or diameter in patients in sinus rhythm, whereas left atrial size has poor predictive utility in patients with atrial fibrillation.
LA volume may better predict events than area or diameter in sinus rhythm; leaves open routine preference pending validation.
Objectives We sought to compare left atrial (LA) volume to LA area and diameter for the prediction of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Background The incremental value of LA volume compared with LA area or diameter as a cardiovascular risk marker has not been evaluated prospectively for patients with sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods Left atrial size was assessed with biplane LA volume, four-chamber LA area, and M-mode dimension for 423 patients (mean age 71 +/- 8 years, 56% men) who were prospectively followed for development of first AF, congestive heart failure, stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and cardiovascular death. Results Of the 317 subjects in sinus rhythm at baseline, 62 had 90 new events during a mean follow-up of 3.5 +/- 2.3 years. All three LA size parameters were independently predictive of combined outcomes (all p < 0.0001). The overall performance for the prediction of cardiovascular events was greatest for LA volume (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve: indexed LA volume 0.71; LA area 0.64; LA diameter 0.59). A graded association between the degree of LA enlargement and risk of cardiovascular events was only evident for indexed LA volume. For subjects with AF, there was no association between LA size and cardiovascular events. Conclusions Left atrial volume is a more robust marker of cardiovascular events than LA area or diameter in subjects with sinus rhythm. The predictive utility of LA size for cardiovascular events in AF was poor, irrespective of the method of LA size quantitation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tsang et al. (2006) conducted a cohort in Sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation (n=423). Biplane left atrial volume vs. Four-chamber left atrial area and M-mode left atrial diameter was evaluated on Combined adverse cardiovascular outcomes (first atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and cardiovascular death) (AUC 0.71 vs 0.64 vs 0.59, p=<0.0001). Indexed left atrial volume outperformed LA area and diameter in predicting cardiovascular events in sinus rhythm (AUC 0.71 vs 0.64 vs 0.59; all p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: