Login
Search
Search
0 Dates
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
0 Events
CPC 2018
CPC 2019
Curso de Atualização em Medicina Cardiovascular 2019
Reunião Anual Conjunta dos Grupos de Estudo de Cirurgia Cardíaca, Doenças Valvulares e Ecocardiografia da SPC
CPC 2020
CPC 2021
CPC 2022
CPC 2023
CPC 2024
0 Topics
A. Basics
B. Imaging
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
D. Heart Failure
E. Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Acute Cardiac Care
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
G. Aortic Disease, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke
H. Interventional Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery
I. Hypertension
J. Preventive Cardiology
K. Cardiovascular Disease In Special Populations
L. Cardiovascular Pharmacology
M. Cardiovascular Nursing
N. E-Cardiology / Digital Health, Public Health, Health Economics, Research Methodology
O. Basic Science
P. Other
0 Themes
01. History of Cardiology
02. Clinical Skills
03. Imaging
04. Arrhythmias, General
05. Atrial Fibrillation
06. Supraventricular Tachycardia (non-AF)
07. Syncope and Bradycardia
08. Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD)
09. Device Therapy
10. Chronic Heart Failure
11. Acute Heart Failure
12. Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
13. Acute Coronary Syndromes
14. Acute Cardiac Care
15. Valvular Heart Disease
16. Infective Endocarditis
17. Myocardial Disease
18. Pericardial Disease
19. Tumors of the Heart
20. Congenital Heart Disease and Pediatric Cardiology
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
22. Aortic Disease
23. Peripheral Vascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
24. Stroke
25. Interventional Cardiology
26. Cardiovascular Surgery
27. Hypertension
28. Risk Factors and Prevention
29. Rehabilitation and Sports Cardiology
30. Cardiovascular Disease in Special Populations
31. Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy
32. Cardiovascular Nursing
33. e-Cardiology / Digital Health
34. Public Health and Health Economics
35. Research Methodology
36. Basic Science
37. Miscellanea
0 Resources
Abstract
Slides
Vídeo
Report
CLEAR FILTERS
Right ventricular function: Is longitudinal strain by speckle-tracking an option?
Session:
CO6 - Imagiologia Cardiovascular
Speaker:
André Azul Freitas
Congress:
CPC 2019
Topic:
B. Imaging
Theme:
03. Imaging
Subtheme:
03.1 Echocardiography
Session Type:
Comunicações Orais
FP Number:
---
Authors:
André Azul Freitas; João André Ferreira; Leticia Bento; Valdirene Gonçalves; Catia Ferreira; James Milner; Vera Martinho; Patrícia M. Alves; Rui Baptista; Elisabete Jorge; Rui M. Martins; Lino Gonçalves
Abstract
<p><strong>INTRODUCTION: </strong>Estimation of right ventricular (RV) performance by echocardiography is challenging due to its anatomical and functional distinctiveness. RV longitudinal strain (RVLS) by speckle-tracking (STE) is an innovative tool and recent studies show that it can be used with prognostic significance, although it isn’t yet standardized. In this study, we aimed to evaluate global (G) and free wall (FW) RVLS-STE and its correlation with common RV evaluation methods.</p> <p><strong>METHODS</strong>: We conducted a prospective, observational study including 65 patients. G and FW RVLS-STE were correlated to tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), Doppler tissue tricuspid lateral annular systolic velocity (S`) and left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF). Following current guidelines, a TAPSE higher than 17mm, a peak S` wave velocity higher than 9.5cm/s and a RVLS-STE inferior to -20% was considered normal.</p> <p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Mean age was 66.34±15.45 years with a male preponderance (61.5%). The comorbidities included 40% of patients with heart failure with reduced LVEF, 29.3% of moderate to severe valvular disease, 9.5% of patients with pulmonary hypertension and 13.8% without significant structural disease. FW RVLS-STE was similar among young (<55 years) or older patients (-20.4% vs -18.3%, p=0.4) or females versus males (-20.1% vs -17.9%, p=0.2). Peak S` wave showed a better correlation with FW RVLS-STE (r²=0.283, p<0.001) than G RVLS-STE (r²=0.152, p<0.001). No correlations were found with TAPSE. A high absolute FW RVLS-STE (< -20%) was a good marker of a normal TAPSE and a normal peak S` wave velocity, with a negative predictive value of 78% and 96% respectively. The cut off values of FW RVLS-STE that best predicted a low TAPSE and low peak S` wave velocity were -14.8% (AUC 0.678 (95% CI 0.53-0.83), p=0.024) and -10.83% (AUC 0.861 (95% CI 0.70-1), p=0.01) respectively. Comparing with a high peak S` wave velocity (>11cm/s), a borderline value (9.5 to 11 cm/s) was associated with a significant reduction of absolute FW RVLS-STE mean (-22.7% vs -16.6%, p=0.002). LVEF was better correlated with G RVLS-STE (r²=0.32, p<0.001) than FW RVLS-STE (r²=0.22, p<0.001) or S` (r²=0.13, p=0.004).</p> <p><strong>CONCLUSION: </strong>FW RVLS-STE is better than G RVLS-STE as a RV evaluation method. RVLS-STE is correlated with peak S` wave velocity and seems to be an accurate marker of RV function particularly detecting early dysfunction. G RVLS-STE is the most closely associated with left ventricular systolic function.</p>
Slides
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
Visit our site