AIMS: Evaluation of left ventricular (LV) myocardial deformation by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) is useful for clinical and research purposes. However, strain measurements depend on the used software. Normative data for QLAB 10 (Philips) are scarce. Additionally, little is known about the influence of anthropometric factors. We aimed to establish normal adult STE-derived strain and strain rate values and to evaluate associations with anthropometrics. METHODS: One hundred fifty-five healthy subjects aged 20 to 72 years (≥28 subjects per decile) were prospectively gathered and examined with electrocardiography and two-dimensional echocardiography. With STE, we assessed peak systolic LV global longitudinal strain (GLS), segmental longitudinal strain, and strain rate from the three standard apical views. RESULTS: We included 147 healthy subjects (age 44.6±13.7 years, 50% female, GLS -20.8±2.0%). Men had significantly lower GLS than women (-20.1±1.8% vs -21.5±2.0%, P<.001). GLS was significantly lower in subjects with age above 55 years (P=.029), higher blood pressure (P<.001), higher body surface area (BSA, P<.001), larger LV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes (both P<.001), lower LV ejection fraction (P<.001), and some indices of diastolic function. After multivariable regression analysis, the correlation with systolic blood pressure, E-wave, and LV end-systolic volume remained significant. The systolic strain rates of most segments correlated with BSA. CONCLUSIONS: Our study resulted in normative LV GLS values assessed with QLAB 10. Male sex, higher BSA, and higher blood pressure negatively influence GLS. Therefore, these factors should be taken into account for strain interpretation in clinical practice.
AIMS: Evaluation of left ventricular (LV) myocardial deformation by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) is useful for clinical and research purposes. However, strain measurements depend on the used software. Normative data for QLAB 10 (Philips) are scarce. Additionally, little is known about the influence of anthropometric factors. We aimed to establish normal adult STE-derived strain and strain rate values and to evaluate associations with anthropometrics. METHODS: One hundred fifty-five healthy subjects aged 20 to 72 years (≥28 subjects per decile) were prospectively gathered and examined with electrocardiography and two-dimensional echocardiography. With STE, we assessed peak systolic LV global longitudinal strain (GLS), segmental longitudinal strain, and strain rate from the three standard apical views. RESULTS: We included 147 healthy subjects (age 44.6±13.7 years, 50% female, GLS -20.8±2.0%). Men had significantly lower GLS than women (-20.1±1.8% vs -21.5±2.0%, P<.001). GLS was significantly lower in subjects with age above 55 years (P=.029), higher blood pressure (P<.001), higher body surface area (BSA, P<.001), larger LV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes (both P<.001), lower LV ejection fraction (P<.001), and some indices of diastolic function. After multivariable regression analysis, the correlation with systolic blood pressure, E-wave, and LV end-systolic volume remained significant. The systolic strain rates of most segments correlated with BSA. CONCLUSIONS: Our study resulted in normative LV GLS values assessed with QLAB 10. Male sex, higher BSA, and higher blood pressure negatively influence GLS. Therefore, these factors should be taken into account for strain interpretation in clinical practice.
Authors: Justin Godown; Debra A Dodd; Michael Stanley; Corey Havens; Meng Xu; James C Slaughter; David W Bearl; Jonathan H Soslow Journal: Pediatr Transplant Date: 2018-03-25
Authors: Zongye Cai; Siyu Tian; Theo Klein; Ly Tu; Laurie W Geenen; Thomas Koudstaal; Annemien E van den Bosch; Yolanda B de Rijke; Irwin K M Reiss; Eric Boersma; Claude van der Ley; Martijn Van Faassen; Ido Kema; Dirk J Duncker; Karin A Boomars; Karin Tran-Lundmark; Christophe Guignabert; Daphne Merkus Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Aseem Pradhan; John Scaringi; Patrick Gerard; Ross Arena; Jonathan Myers; Leonard A Kaminsky; Ethan Kung Journal: Cardiovasc Eng Technol Date: 2021-10-19 Impact factor: 2.305
Authors: Anna E Bortnick; Claudia Lama von Buchwald; Aliaskar Hasani; Christina Liu; Julia L Berkowitz; Shayna Vega; Mohammad Hashim Mustehsan; Diana S Wolfe; Cynthia Taub Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2021-05-08 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: Tom Kai Ming Wang; Milind Y Desai; Patrick Collier; Richard A Grimm; Brian P Griffin; Zoran B Popović Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2020-12
Authors: Sven-Oliver Tröbs; Jürgen H Prochaska; Sören Schwuchow-Thonke; Andreas Schulz; Felix Müller; Marc William Heidorn; Sebastian Göbel; Simon Diestelmeier; Jaume Lerma Monteverde; Karl J Lackner; Tommaso Gori; Thomas Münzel; Philipp S Wild Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 30.154
Authors: Anna Reka Kiss; Zsófia Gregor; Adam Furak; Attila Tóth; Márton Horváth; Liliana Szabo; Csilla Czimbalmos; Zsofia Dohy; Bela Merkely; Hajnalka Vago; Andrea Szucs Journal: Anatol J Cardiol Date: 2021-08 Impact factor: 1.596