AIMS: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) seems accurate for detecting subclinical myocardial dysfunction, and may therefore be used to improve risk stratification for cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Longitudinal strain (by two-dimensional speckle tracking) was computed in 425 patients [mean age 67 ± 13 years, 69% male, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 51 ± 13%] referred for cardiac surgery [isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n = 155), aortic valve surgery (n = 174), mitral surgery (n = 96)]. GLS (global-ε) was assessed for predicting early postoperative death. Despite a fair correlation between LVEF and global strain (r = -0.73, P < 0.0001), 40% of patients with preserved LVEF (defined as LVEF ≥50%) had abnormal global-ε (defined as global-ε >-16%): -12.8 ± 1.7%, range -15% to -8%. In patients with preserved LVEF, NT-proBNP level (983 vs. 541 pg/mL, P = 0.03), heart failure symptoms (NYHA class, 2.2 ± 0.9 vs. 1.9 ± 0.9, P = 0.02), and the need for prolonged (>48 h) inotropic support after surgery (33.3 vs. 21.2%, P = 0.03) were greater when global-ε was impaired. Importantly, despite similar EuroSCORE (9.7 ± 12 vs. 7.7 ± 9%, P = 0.2 for EuroSCORE I and 4.2 ± 6.2 vs. 3.4 ± 4.9%, P = 0.4 for EuroSCORE II), the rate of postoperative death was 2.4-fold (11.8 vs. 4.9%, P = 0.04) in patients with preserved LVEF when global-ε was impaired. Multivariate analysis showed that global-ε is an independent predictor for early postoperative mortality [odds ratio = 1.10 (1.01-1.21)] after adjustment to EuroSCORE. CONCLUSION: GLS has an incremental value over LVEF for risk stratification in patients referred for cardiac surgery.
AIMS: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) seems accurate for detecting subclinical myocardial dysfunction, and may therefore be used to improve risk stratification for cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Longitudinal strain (by two-dimensional speckle tracking) was computed in 425 patients [mean age 67 ± 13 years, 69% male, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 51 ± 13%] referred for cardiac surgery [isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n = 155), aortic valve surgery (n = 174), mitral surgery (n = 96)]. GLS (global-ε) was assessed for predicting early postoperative death. Despite a fair correlation between LVEF and global strain (r = -0.73, P < 0.0001), 40% of patients with preserved LVEF (defined as LVEF ≥50%) had abnormal global-ε (defined as global-ε >-16%): -12.8 ± 1.7%, range -15% to -8%. In patients with preserved LVEF, NT-proBNP level (983 vs. 541 pg/mL, P = 0.03), heart failure symptoms (NYHA class, 2.2 ± 0.9 vs. 1.9 ± 0.9, P = 0.02), and the need for prolonged (>48 h) inotropic support after surgery (33.3 vs. 21.2%, P = 0.03) were greater when global-ε was impaired. Importantly, despite similar EuroSCORE (9.7 ± 12 vs. 7.7 ± 9%, P = 0.2 for EuroSCORE I and 4.2 ± 6.2 vs. 3.4 ± 4.9%, P = 0.4 for EuroSCORE II), the rate of postoperative death was 2.4-fold (11.8 vs. 4.9%, P = 0.04) in patients with preserved LVEF when global-ε was impaired. Multivariate analysis showed that global-ε is an independent predictor for early postoperative mortality [odds ratio = 1.10 (1.01-1.21)] after adjustment to EuroSCORE. CONCLUSION: GLS has an incremental value over LVEF for risk stratification in patients referred for cardiac surgery.
Authors: Eduardo Casas-Rojo; Covadonga Fernández-Golfin; José Luis Moya-Mur; Ariana González-Gómez; Ana García-Martín; Laura Morán-Fernández; Daniel Rodríguez-Muñoz; José Julio Jiménez-Nacher; David Martí Sánchez; José Luis Zamorano Gómez Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Abraham Sonny; Andrej Alfirevic; Shiva Sale; Nicole M Zimmerman; Jing You; A Marc Gillinov; Daniel I Sessler; Andra E Duncan Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Kan Zhang; Richard Sheu; Nicole M Zimmerman; Andrej Alfirevic; Shiva Sale; A Marc Gillinov; Andra E Duncan Journal: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth Date: 2018-10-24 Impact factor: 2.628
Authors: K Balderas-Muñoz; H Rodríguez-Zanella; J F Fritche-Salazar; N Ávila-Vanzzini; L E Juárez Orozco; J A Arias-Godínez; O Calvillo-Argüelles; S Rivera-Peralta; J C Sauza-Sosa; M E Ruiz-Esparza; E Bucio-Reta; A Rómero; N Espinola-Zavaleta; B Domínguez-Mendez; M Gaxiola-Macias; M A Martínez-Ríos Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-05-09 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Manhal Izzy; Lisa B VanWagner; Grace Lin; Mario Altieri; James Y Findlay; Jae K Oh; Kymberly D Watt; Samuel S Lee Journal: Hepatology Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Elissa A S Polomski; Julius C Heemelaar; Augustinus D G Krol; Marloes Louwerens; Saskia L M A Beeres; Eduard R Holman; J Wouter Jukema; Martin J Schalij; M Louisa Antoni Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-08 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Rathika Krishnasamy; Nicole M Isbel; Carmel M Hawley; Elaine M Pascoe; Matthew Burrage; Rodel Leano; Brian A Haluska; Thomas H Marwick; Tony Stanton Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 3.240