| Literature DB >> 23961879 |
Hack-Lyoung Kim1, Joo-Hee Zo, Jae-Bin Seo, Woo-Young Chung, Yong-Jin Kim, Sang-Hyun Kim, Myung-A Kim, Dae-Won Sohn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been a lack of research on further stratification of subjects who have pseudonormal pattern of mitral inflow. The study aim was to clarify 2 different groups with different diastolic function grades among these subjects using lateral tissue Doppler imaging (TDI).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23961879 PMCID: PMC3751783 DOI: 10.1186/1476-7120-11-31
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound ISSN: 1476-7120 Impact factor: 2.062
Figure 1Representative figures of a subject with concordance (upper 3 figures) and discordance pattern (lower 3 figures) of tissue Doppler imaging.
Figure 2Schematic figures showing enrollment flow of study subjects.
Comparisons of characteristics among study subjects
| Age, years | 56.0 ± 13.2 | 59.6 ± 14.1 | 53.5 ± 12.0 | 0.012 |
| Male sex, n (%) | 59 (48.4) | 23 (46.0) | 36 (50.0) | 0.664 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 25.2 ± 4.1 | 25.7 ± 4.1 | 24.6 ± 4.2 | 0.336 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 51 (41.8) | 24 (48.0) | 27 (37.5) | 0.248 |
| Diabetes, n (%) | 17 (13.9) | 10 (20.0) | 7 (9.7) | 0.107 |
| Dyslipidemia, n (%) | 19 (15.6) | 12 (16.7) | 7 (14.0) | 0.690 |
| Echocardiographic parameters | | | | |
| LVESD, mm | 29.6 ± 3.6 | 30.7 ± 3.4 | 28.8 ± 3.5 | 0.004 |
| LVEDD, mm | 48.0 ± 4.3 | 49.5 ± 3.0 | 47.4 ± 3.0 | < 0.001 |
| LVEF, % | 68.1 ± 5.0 | 67.4 ± 5.8 | 68.6 ± 4.2 | 0.213 |
| LVSWT, mm | 9.3 ± 1.4 | 9.5 ± 1.7 | 9.2 ± 1.3 | 0.234 |
| LVPWT, mm | 9.2 ± 1.3 | 9.2 ± 1.6 | 9.1 ± 1.0 | 0.563 |
| LA dimension, mm | 36.7 ± 5.2 | 39.0 ± 5.3 | 35.2 ± 4.6 | < 0.001 |
| LA volume index, ml/m2 | 21.4 ± 8.6 | 26.4 ± 8.8 | 17.9 ± 6.6 | < 0.001 |
| E wave velocity, cm/s | 80 ± 16 | 84 ± 19 | 77 ± 13 | 0.027 |
| A wave velocity, cm/s | 64 ± 14 | 68 ± 16 | 61 ± 12 | 0.009 |
| Deceleration time, ms | 205 ± 36 | 208 ± 41 | 202 ± 32 | 0.384 |
| Septal e’ velocity, cm/s | 7.1 ± 1.7 | 6.4 ± 1.7 | 7.5 ± 1.6 | < 0.001 |
| Septal a’ velocity, cm/s | 9.5 ± 2.1 | 9.3 ± 2.1 | 9.7 ± 2.0 | < 0.001 |
| Lateral e’ velocity, cm/s | 10.0 ± 2.6 | 8.2 ± 2.0 | 11.1 ± 2.1 | 0.027 |
| Lateral a’ velocity, cm/s | 9.6 ± 2.2 | 10.6 ± 2.5 | 8.9 ± 1.8 | 0.009 |
| E/e’ (septal) | 12.2 ± 5.2 | 14.5 ± 6.4 | 10.7 ± 3.5 | < 0.001 |
BMI body mass index, LVESD left ventricular end-systolic dimension, LVEDD left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, LVSWT left ventricular septal wall thickness, LVPWT left ventricular posterior wall thickness, LA left atrium.
*significance from the result of comparison between concordance and discordance groups.
Figure 3Distribution of normal and grade II diastolic dysfunction according to lateral tissue Doppler imaging patterns.
Figure 4Scatter plots showing the associations of lateral e’/a’ with left atrial volume index (A) and age (B). LA, left atrium. r, correlation coefficient.
Independent associations between left atrial volume index and variables
| Age | 0.349 | 2.892 | 0.006 |
| Female sex | 0.021 | 0.189 | 0.850 |
| Body mass index | 0.248 | 2.086 | 0.042 |
| Diabetes | 0.136 | 1.245 | 0.219 |
| Hypertension | 0.013 | 0.115 | 0.909 |
| Lateral e’/a’ | −0.484 | −4.677 | < 0.001 |
Figure 5Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showing the value of lateral e’/a’ predicting left atrial volume index ≥ 34 ml/m AUC, area under curve; CI, confidence interval.