Daniel Forsha1, Niels Risum2, P Andrea Kropf3, Sudarshan Rajagopal4, P Brian Smith5, Ronald J Kanter3, Zainab Samad4, Peter Sogaard6, Piers Barker3, Joseph Kisslo4. 1. Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: daniel.forsha@duke.edu. 2. Department of Cardiology, Gentofte University Hospital, Gentofte, Denmark. 3. Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 4. Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina. 6. Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although quantitative right ventricular (RV) strain analysis may be useful in congenital and acquired heart disease populations with RV failure, a comprehensive, standardized approach is lacking. An 18-segment RV strain analysis obtained from three standardized RV apical echocardiographic images was used to determine the feasibility, normal values, and reproducibility of the method in normal adults. METHODS:Forty healthy, prospectively enrolled volunteers with no cardiac histories and normal QRS durations underwent echocardiography optimized for strain analysis including three RV apical views. Two-dimensional speckle-tracking longitudinal strain analysis was performed using EchoPAC software. Eleven retrospectively identified subjects with RV disease were included as a pilot population. All had been imaged using the same protocol including the three RV apical views. RESULTS: All control subjects had normal anatomic morphology and function by echocardiography. Feasibility of the RV strain analysis was good (adequate tracking in 696 of 720 segments [97%]). RV global peak systolic strain was -23 ± 2%. Peak strain was highest in the RV free wall and lowest in the septum. Dyssynchrony indices demonstrated no dyssynchrony using left ventricular criteria. Reproducibility of most strain measures was acceptable. This methodology identified important disease not seen in the four-chamber apical view alone in the pilot population of 11 patients with RV disease. Strain patterns and values were different from those in the control population, indicating that differences do exist from normal. CONCLUSIONS: Eighteen-segment RV strain analysis is feasible, with strain measures falling into discrete ranges in this normal population. Those with RV disease illustrate the potential utility of this approach. These data indicate that this model can be used for more detailed studies evaluating abnormal RV populations, in which its full potential can be assessed. Crown
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Although quantitative right ventricular (RV) strain analysis may be useful in congenital and acquired heart disease populations with RV failure, a comprehensive, standardized approach is lacking. An 18-segment RV strain analysis obtained from three standardized RV apical echocardiographic images was used to determine the feasibility, normal values, and reproducibility of the method in normal adults. METHODS: Forty healthy, prospectively enrolled volunteers with no cardiac histories and normal QRS durations underwent echocardiography optimized for strain analysis including three RV apical views. Two-dimensional speckle-tracking longitudinal strain analysis was performed using EchoPAC software. Eleven retrospectively identified subjects with RV disease were included as a pilot population. All had been imaged using the same protocol including the three RV apical views. RESULTS: All control subjects had normal anatomic morphology and function by echocardiography. Feasibility of the RV strain analysis was good (adequate tracking in 696 of 720 segments [97%]). RV global peak systolic strain was -23 ± 2%. Peak strain was highest in the RV free wall and lowest in the septum. Dyssynchrony indices demonstrated no dyssynchrony using left ventricular criteria. Reproducibility of most strain measures was acceptable. This methodology identified important disease not seen in the four-chamber apical view alone in the pilot population of 11 patients with RV disease. Strain patterns and values were different from those in the control population, indicating that differences do exist from normal. CONCLUSIONS: Eighteen-segment RV strain analysis is feasible, with strain measures falling into discrete ranges in this normal population. Those with RV disease illustrate the potential utility of this approach. These data indicate that this model can be used for more detailed studies evaluating abnormal RV populations, in which its full potential can be assessed. Crown
Authors: Roberto M Lang; Michelle Bierig; Richard B Devereux; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Patricia A Pellikka; Michael H Picard; Mary J Roman; James Seward; Jack S Shanewise; Scott D Solomon; Kirk T Spencer; Martin St John Sutton; William J Stewart Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Anne M Dubin; Jan Janousek; Edward Rhee; Margaret J Strieper; Frank Cecchin; Ian H Law; Kevin M Shannon; Joel Temple; Eric Rosenthal; Frank J Zimmerman; Andrew Davis; Peter P Karpawich; Amin Al Ahmad; Victoria L Vetter; Naomi J Kertesz; Maully Shah; Christopher Snyder; Elizabeth Stephenson; Mathias Emmel; Shubhayan Sanatani; Ronald Kanter; Anjan Batra; Kathryn K Collins Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-12-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jan Janousek; Viktor Tomek; V Aclav Chaloupecký; Oleg Reich; Roman A Gebauer; Josef Kautzner; Bohumil Hucín Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-11-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Frank Cecchin; Patricia A Frangini; David W Brown; Francis Fynn-Thompson; Mark E Alexander; John K Triedman; Kimberlee Gauvreau; Edward P Walsh; Charles I Berul Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2008-09-03
Authors: Pak-Cheong Chow; Xue-Cun Liang; Wendy W M Lam; Eddie W Y Cheung; Kin-Tak Wong; Yiu-Fai Cheung Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2008-02-21 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Philip T Levy; Brittney Dioneda; Mark R Holland; Timothy J Sekarski; Caroline K Lee; Amit Mathur; W Todd Cade; Alison G Cahill; Aaron Hamvas; Gautam K Singh Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2015-03-07 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: A Malagoli; A Albini; G E Mandoli; A Baggiano; G Vinco; F Bandera; A D'Andrea; R Esposito; F D'Ascenzi; R Sorrentino; C Santoro; G Benfari; F Contorni; M Cameli Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-06-10 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Jonathan R Malowitz; Daniel E Forsha; P Brian Smith; C Michael Cotten; Piers C Barker; Gregory H Tatum Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-04-06 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Yossra Mahran; Robert Schueler; Marcel Weber; Carmen Pizarro; Georg Nickenig; Dirk Skowasch; Christoph Hammerstingl Journal: World J Cardiol Date: 2016-08-26
Authors: Collin T Erickson; Meghna D Patel; Swati Choudhry; Karl Stessy Bisselou; Tim Sekarski; Mary Craft; Ling Li; Afif El Khuffash; Aaron Hamvas; Shelby Kutty; Gautam K Singh; Philip T Levy Journal: Cardiol Young Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 1.093