Tor Biering-Sørensen1, Sofie Reumert Biering-Sørensen2, Flemming Javier Olsen2, Morten Sengeløv2, Peter Godsk Jørgensen2, Rasmus Mogelvang2, Amil M Shah2, Jan Skov Jensen2. 1. From the Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital (T.B.-S., S.R.B.-S., F.J.O., M.S., P.G.J., R.M., J.S.J.), The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital (T.B.-S., S.R.B.-S., P.G.J., R.M., J.S.J.), and Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences (J.S.J.), University of Copenhagen, Denmark; and Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Medicine Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (T.B.-S., A.M.S.). tor.biering@gmail.com. 2. From the Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital (T.B.-S., S.R.B.-S., F.J.O., M.S., P.G.J., R.M., J.S.J.), The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital (T.B.-S., S.R.B.-S., P.G.J., R.M., J.S.J.), and Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences (J.S.J.), University of Copenhagen, Denmark; and Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Medicine Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (T.B.-S., A.M.S.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) is prognostic of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in various patient populations, but the prognostic utility of GLS for long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1296 participants in a general population study underwent a health examination, including echocardiography measurement of GLS. The primary end point was the composite of incident heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. During a median follow-up of 11 years, 149 (12%) participants were diagnosed with heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. Lower GLS was associated with a higher risk of the composite end point (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.17; P<0.001 per 1% decrease), an association that persisted after multivariable adjustment for age, sex, heart rate, hypertension, systolic blood pressure, left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular mass index, left ventricular dimension, deceleration time, left atrium dimension, E/e', and pro B-type natriuretic peptide (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.11; P=0.045 per 1% decrease). GLS provided incremental prognostic information beyond the Framingham Risk Score, the Systemic Coronary Evaluation risk chart, and the modified American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Pooled Cohort Equation for the composite outcome and incident heart failure. Sex modified the relationship between GLS and outcome such that after multivariable adjustment, GLS was an independent predictor of outcomes in men but not in women (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.24; P=0.001, and hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.07; P=0.81, respectively; P for interaction =0.032). CONCLUSIONS: In the general population, GLS provides independent and incremental prognostic information regarding long-term risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. GLS seems to be a stronger prognosticator in men than in women.
BACKGROUND: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) is prognostic of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in various patient populations, but the prognostic utility of GLS for long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1296 participants in a general population study underwent a health examination, including echocardiography measurement of GLS. The primary end point was the composite of incident heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. During a median follow-up of 11 years, 149 (12%) participants were diagnosed with heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. Lower GLS was associated with a higher risk of the composite end point (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.17; P<0.001 per 1% decrease), an association that persisted after multivariable adjustment for age, sex, heart rate, hypertension, systolic blood pressure, left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular mass index, left ventricular dimension, deceleration time, left atrium dimension, E/e', and pro B-type natriuretic peptide (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.11; P=0.045 per 1% decrease). GLS provided incremental prognostic information beyond the Framingham Risk Score, the Systemic Coronary Evaluation risk chart, and the modified American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Pooled Cohort Equation for the composite outcome and incident heart failure. Sex modified the relationship between GLS and outcome such that after multivariable adjustment, GLS was an independent predictor of outcomes in men but not in women (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.24; P=0.001, and hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.07; P=0.81, respectively; P for interaction =0.032). CONCLUSIONS: In the general population, GLS provides independent and incremental prognostic information regarding long-term risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. GLS seems to be a stronger prognosticator in men than in women.
Authors: David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson; Harmon S Jordan; Lev Nevo; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Tor Biering-Sørensen; Dorit Knappe; Anne-Catherine Pouleur; Brian Claggett; Paul J Wang; Arthur J Moss; Scott D Solomon; Valentina Kutyifa Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Khurram Nasir; Boaz D Rosen; Holly J Kramer; Thor Edvardsen; David A Bluemke; Kiang Liu; João A C Lima Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Arumugam Narayanan; Gerard P Aurigemma; Marcello Chinali; Jeffrey C Hill; Theo E Meyer; Dennis A Tighe Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-07-21 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Susan Cheng; Elizabeth L McCabe; Martin G Larson; Allison A Merz; Ewa Osypiuk; Birgitta T Lehman; Plamen Stantchev; Jayashri Aragam; Scott D Solomon; Emelia J Benjamin; Ramachandran S Vasan Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2015-10-27 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Juan E Ortuño; Gonzalo Vegas-Sánchez-Ferrero; Juan J Gómez-Valverde; Marcus Y Chen; Andrés Santos; Elliot R McVeigh; María J Ledesma-Carbayo Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2020-06-06 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Tor Biering-Sørensen; Gabriela Querejeta Roca; Sheila M Hegde; Amil M Shah; Brian Claggett; Thomas H Mosley; Kenneth R Butler; Scott D Solomon Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Chike C Nwabuo; Yuichiro Yano; Henrique T Moreira; Duke Appiah; Henrique D Vasconcellos; Queen N Aghaji; Anthony Viera; Jamal S Rana; Ravi V Shah; Venkatesh L Murthy; Norrina B Allen; Pamela J Schreiner; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; João A C Lima Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 14.676