BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular (LV) global strain by speckle tracking as predictors of final infarct size. METHODS: LV global strain and LVEF by echocardiography were assessed in the acute phase and after revascularization in 39 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with thrombolysis. RESULTS: After revascularization, global strain and LVEF correlated well with infarct size measured by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance. A cutoff value of -15.0% for global strain had a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 86% to identify myocardial infarcts larger than 20%. Interobserver variability, expressed by intraclass correlation coefficients, for global strain and LVEF was 0.91 and 0.72, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: LV global strain is a more precise diagnostic predictor of large infarcts compared with LVEF and is more reproducible. Global strain measured after revascularization demonstrates advantages over LVEF in the evaluation of LV injury in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular (LV) global strain by speckle tracking as predictors of final infarct size. METHODS: LV global strain and LVEF by echocardiography were assessed in the acute phase and after revascularization in 39 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with thrombolysis. RESULTS: After revascularization, global strain and LVEF correlated well with infarct size measured by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance. A cutoff value of -15.0% for global strain had a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 86% to identify myocardial infarcts larger than 20%. Interobserver variability, expressed by intraclass correlation coefficients, for global strain and LVEF was 0.91 and 0.72, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: LV global strain is a more precise diagnostic predictor of large infarcts compared with LVEF and is more reproducible. Global strain measured after revascularization demonstrates advantages over LVEF in the evaluation of LV injury in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
Authors: Nathan F Johnson; Brian T Gold; Alison L Bailey; Jody L Clasey; Jonathan G Hakun; Matthew White; Doug E Long; David K Powell Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: John W Petersen; John R Forder; James D Thomas; Lemuel A Moyé; Mark Lawson; Catalin Loghin; Jay H Traverse; Sarah Baraniuk; Guilherme Silva; Carl J Pepine Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-06
Authors: Silvio Henrique Barberato; Minna Moreira Dias Romano; Adenalva Lima de Souza Beck; Ana Clara Tude Rodrigues; André Luiz Cerqueira de Almeida; Bruna Morhy Borges Leal Assunção; Eliza de Almeida Gripp; Fabio Villaça Guimarães Filho; Henry Abensur; José Maria Del Castillo; Marcelo Haertel Miglioranza; Marcelo Luiz Campos Vieira; Márcio Vinicius Lins de Barros; Maria do Carmo Pereira Nunes; Maria Estefania Bosco Otto; Renato de Aguiar Hortegal; Rodrigo Bellio de Mattos Barretto; Thais Harada Campos; Vicente Nicoliello de Siqueira; Samira Saady Morhy Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2019-08-08 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Juan Lacalzada; Alejandro de la Rosa; María Manuela Izquierdo; Juan José Jiménez; José Luis Iribarren; Martín Jesús García-González; Belén Marí López; María Amelia Duque; Antonio Barragán; Celestino Hernández; María Carrillo-Pérez; Ignacio Laynez Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-01-18 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Yanping Cheng; Michael S Aboodi; Andrew S Wechsler; Greg L Kaluza; Juan F Granada; Kevin Van Bladel; Lon S Annest; Geng-Hua Yi Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2013-08-28