BACKGROUND: This study evaluated 3 new automated methods, based on a combination of speckle tracking and tissue Doppler, for the analysis of strain rate (SR) and strain. Feasibility and values for peak systolic strain rate (SR s ) and end-systolic strain (S es ) were assessed. METHODS: Thirty patients with myocardial infarction and 30 normal subjects were examined. Customized software with automatic definition of segments was used for automated measurements. SR s and SR es were measured over each segment simultaneously and identified automatically. The study compared tissue Doppler-based SR and strain measurements without (method 1) and with segment tracking (method 2) to speckle tracking-based measurements (method 3). For tracking, speckle tracking and tissue Doppler were used in combination. Standard manual analysis was used as a reference. RESULTS: The automated analysis (16 segments, 3 apical views) required 2 minutes; manual analysis took 11 minutes. Accuracy was compared in 56 segments (28 mid-infarcted and 28 normal) from 28 patients and was 93.9% for method 1, 93.8% for method 2, 95.8% for method 3, and 96.2% for the manual method. In the normal group, mean SR s (0.27 s -1 ) was less with method 3 than with the other methods ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that automated analysis of SR and strain, with some manual adjustment, is feasible and quicker than manual analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was similar with all methods. SR s was lower in the speckle tracking-based method than in the Doppler-based methods.
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated 3 new automated methods, based on a combination of speckle tracking and tissue Doppler, for the analysis of strain rate (SR) and strain. Feasibility and values for peak systolic strain rate (SR s ) and end-systolic strain (S es ) were assessed. METHODS: Thirty patients with myocardial infarction and 30 normal subjects were examined. Customized software with automatic definition of segments was used for automated measurements. SR s and SR es were measured over each segment simultaneously and identified automatically. The study compared tissue Doppler-based SR and strain measurements without (method 1) and with segment tracking (method 2) to speckle tracking-based measurements (method 3). For tracking, speckle tracking and tissue Doppler were used in combination. Standard manual analysis was used as a reference. RESULTS: The automated analysis (16 segments, 3 apical views) required 2 minutes; manual analysis took 11 minutes. Accuracy was compared in 56 segments (28 mid-infarcted and 28 normal) from 28 patients and was 93.9% for method 1, 93.8% for method 2, 95.8% for method 3, and 96.2% for the manual method. In the normal group, mean SR s (0.27 s -1 ) was less with method 3 than with the other methods ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that automated analysis of SR and strain, with some manual adjustment, is feasible and quicker than manual analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was similar with all methods. SR s was lower in the speckle tracking-based method than in the Doppler-based methods.
Authors: Nowell M Fine; Aijaz A Shah; Il-Yong Han; Yang Yu; Ju-Feng Hsiao; Yuki Koshino; Hayder K Saleh; Fletcher A Miller; Jae K Oh; Patricia A Pellikka; Hector R Villarraga Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-09-14 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Katherine M Parker; Alexander P Clark; Norman C Goodman; David K Glover; Jeffrey W Holmes Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2014-05-12 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Laura Stefani; Loira Toncelli; Marco Gianassi; Paolo Manetti; Valentina Di Tante; Maria Robertina Concetta Vono; Andrea Moretti; Brunello Cappelli; Gianni Pedrizzetti; Giorgio Galanti Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound Date: 2007-02-07 Impact factor: 2.062