Hanna Ruotsalainen1, Hannah Bellsham-Revell2, Aaron Bell2, Jaana Pihkala3, Tiina Ojala4, John Simpson2. 1. Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital, University Hospital of Helsinki and University of Helsinki, Stenbackinkatu 11, PL 281, Helsinki 00029 HUS, Finland Department of Pediatrics, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland. 2. Department of Congenital Heart Disease, Evelina London Children's Hospital, London, UK. 3. Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital, University Hospital of Helsinki and University of Helsinki, Stenbackinkatu 11, PL 281, Helsinki 00029 HUS, Finland. 4. Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital, University Hospital of Helsinki and University of Helsinki, Stenbackinkatu 11, PL 281, Helsinki 00029 HUS, Finland tiina.h.ojala@hus.fi.
Abstract
AIMS: Velocity vector imaging (VVI) is an echocardiographic technique based on speckle tracking, which has been validated for the left ventricle (LV). It has not been validated to assess the systemic right ventricle (RV) in patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether VVI measurements reliably reflect RV systolic function in patients with HLHS when compared with RV ejection fraction (EF) calculated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective study, 49 children with HLHS underwent transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac MRI under the same general anaesthetic as a part of routine assessment between the different stages of palliative surgery. Global RV fractional area change (FAC-VVI), strain (S), strain rate (SR), and peak systolic velocity (V) were analysed from the apical four-chamber view using the VVI technique. MRI-derived EF was calculated from a short-axis cine stack of images. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility was excellent for all VVI parameters (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.9). All VVI-derived parameters, except myocardial velocity, correlated with MRI-derived EF (FAC-VVI: R = 0.7, P < 0.001; S: R = -0.5, P < 0.001; SR: R = 0.5, P = 0.001, and V: R = 0.1, P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: All VVI-derived parameters, except V, correlate with MRI-derived EF, with FAC being the best predictor of it. Reproducibility of all VVI parameters is excellent. VVI provides a useful tool for the follow-up of RV function during the staged treatment protocol for HLHS. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Velocity vector imaging (VVI) is an echocardiographic technique based on speckle tracking, which has been validated for the left ventricle (LV). It has not been validated to assess the systemic right ventricle (RV) in patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether VVI measurements reliably reflect RV systolic function in patients with HLHS when compared with RV ejection fraction (EF) calculated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective study, 49 children with HLHS underwent transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac MRI under the same general anaesthetic as a part of routine assessment between the different stages of palliative surgery. Global RV fractional area change (FAC-VVI), strain (S), strain rate (SR), and peak systolic velocity (V) were analysed from the apical four-chamber view using the VVI technique. MRI-derived EF was calculated from a short-axis cine stack of images. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility was excellent for all VVI parameters (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.9). All VVI-derived parameters, except myocardial velocity, correlated with MRI-derived EF (FAC-VVI: R = 0.7, P < 0.001; S: R = -0.5, P < 0.001; SR: R = 0.5, P = 0.001, and V: R = 0.1, P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: All VVI-derived parameters, except V, correlate with MRI-derived EF, with FAC being the best predictor of it. Reproducibility of all VVI parameters is excellent. VVI provides a useful tool for the follow-up of RV function during the staged treatment protocol for HLHS. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Nagesh S Anavekar; David Gerson; Hicham Skali; Raymond Y Kwong; E Kent Yucel; Scott D Solomon Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Manish Bansal; Goo-Yeong Cho; Jonathan Chan; Rodel Leano; Brian A Haluska; Thomas H Marwick Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Ken J Lu; Janet X C Chen; Konstantinos Profitis; Leighton G Kearney; Dimuth DeSilva; Gerard Smith; Michelle Ord; Susan Harberts; Paul Calafiore; Elizabeth Jones; Piyush M Srivastava Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Bahar Pirat; Dirar S Khoury; Craig J Hartley; Les Tiller; Liyun Rao; Daryl G Schulz; Sherif F Nagueh; William A Zoghbi Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-02-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Hannah R Bellsham-Revell; Shane M Tibby; Aaron J Bell; Thomas Witter; John Simpson; Philipp Beerbaum; David Anderson; Conal B Austin; Gerald F Greil; Reza Razavi Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-12-26 Impact factor: 24.094