| Literature DB >> 28265790 |
Dan Liu1,2, Kai Hu1,2, Sebastian Herrmann1,2, Maja Cikes3, Georg Ertl1,2, Frank Weidemann4, Stefan Störk5,6, Peter Nordbeck7,8.
Abstract
Prognosis of patients with light-chain cardiac amyloidosis (AL-CA) is poor. Speckle tracking imaging (STI) derived longitudinal deformation parameters and Doppler-derived left ventricular (LV) Tei index are valuable predictors of outcome in patients with AL-CA. We estimated the prognostic utility of Tei index and deformation parameters in 58 comprehensively phenotyped patients with AL-CA after a median follow-up of 365 days (quartiles 121, 365 days). The primary end point was all-cause mortality. 19 (33%) patients died during follow-up. Tei index (0.89 ± 0.29 vs. 0.61 ± 0.16, p < 0.001) and E to global early diastolic strain rate ratio (E/GLSRdias) were higher while global longitudinal systolic strain (GLSsys) was lower in non-survivors than in survivors (all p < 0.05). Tei index, NYHA functional class, GLSsys and E/GLSRdias were independent predictors of all-cause mortality risk, and Tei index ≥0.9 (HR 7.01, 95% CI 2.43-20.21, p < 0.001) was the best predictor of poor outcome. Combining Tei index and GLSsys yielded the best results on predicting death within 1 year (100% with Tei index ≥0.9 and GLSsys ≤13%) or survival (95% with Tei index ≤0.9 and GLSsys ≥13%). We conclude that 1-year mortality risk in AL-CA patients can be reliably predicted using Tei index or deformation parameters, with combined analysis offering best performance.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiomyopathy; Strain rate; Tei index; Tissue Doppler echocardiography
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28265790 PMCID: PMC5406485 DOI: 10.1007/s10554-017-1075-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging ISSN: 1569-5794 Impact factor: 2.357
Fig. 1Example of a Tissue Doppler derived Tei index. Time intervals of left ventricle are measured with tissue Doppler imaging and the Tei index is calculated by the formula: (MCO-ET)/ET. MCO mitral valve closure-to-opening time, ET ejection time, IVCT isovolumetric contraction time, IVRT isovolumetric relaxation time, S′ peak systolic septal mitral annular velocity, E′ peak early-diastolic septal mitral annular velocity, A′ peak late-diastolic septal mitral annular velocity
Clinical characteristics
| Total | Survivors | Non-survivors | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 58 | N = 39 | N = 19 | ||
| Age (years) | 64 ± 10 | 65 ± 9 | 64 ± 11 | 0.618 |
| Male (n, %) | 31, 53% | 23, 59% | 8, 42% | 0.227 |
| BMI (kg/m²) | 25 ± 4 | 24 ± 4 | 26 ± 5 | 0.123 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 116 ± 20 | 118 ± 18 | 112 ± 24 | 0.352 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 73 ± 13 | 74 ± 12 | 70 ± 13 | 0.305 |
| Heart rate (beats/min) | 79 ± 12 | 77 ± 11 | 84 ± 13 | 0.070 |
| NYHA functional class (n, %) | 0.019 | |||
| I | 2, 3% | 1, 3% | 1, 5% | |
| II | 26, 45% | 24, 61% | 2, 11% | |
| III | 24, 42% | 12, 31% | 12, 63% | |
| IV | 6, 10% | 2, 5% | 4, 21% | |
| NYHA class III–IV (n, %) | 30, 52% | 14, 36% | 16, 84% | 0.001 |
| eGFR (ml/min/1.73 m²) | 62 ± 30 | 64 ± 32 | 59 ± 26 | 0.526 |
| Albumin (g/dl) | 3.6 ± 0.8 | 3.6 ± 0.8 | 3.8 ± 0.6 | 0.169 |
| NT-proBNP (pg/ml) | 4543 (1615–13,505) | 2595 (955–8765) | 8062 (3533–16,451) | 0.181 |
BMI body mass index, NYHA New York Heart Association, eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate, NT-proBNP N-terminal of the prohormone brain natriuretic peptide
Echocardiographic characteristics
| Total | Survivors | Non-survivors | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 58 | N = 39 | N = 19 | ||
| Standard measurements | ||||
| LV-EDD (mm) | 45 ± 7 | 45 ± 7 | 45 ± 8 | 0.789 |
| IVSd (mm) | 14.7 ± 3.1 | 14.1 ± 3.1 | 15.6 ± 2.9 | 0.082 |
| LV-PWd (mm) | 14.3 ± 3.2 | 13.6 ± 3.2 | 15.1 ± 2.5 | 0.083 |
| LV-FS (%) | 27 ± 9 | 30 ± 7 | 22 ± 8 | <0.001 |
| LV-EF (%) | 54 ± 12 | 58 ± 10 | 47 ± 13 | 0.001 |
| SV (ml) | 41 ± 16 | 42 ± 16 | 40 ± 17 | 0.569 |
| Septal MAPSE (mm) | 5.9 ± 2.6 | 6.6 ± 2.5 | 4.6 ± 2.2 | 0.005 |
| LA (mm) | 43 ± 7 | 43 ± 8 | 44 ± 6 | 0.487 |
| E (cm/s) | 0.89 ± 0.23 | 0.88 ± 0.25 | 0.92 ± 0.21 | 0.479 |
| E/A ratio | 1.68 ± 0.91 | 1.56 ± 0.98 | 1.84 ± 0.73 | 0.334 |
| DT (ms) | 161 ± 57 | 171 ± 58 | 136 ± 42 | 0.031 |
| E/E′ ratio | 23.2 ± 10.3 | 21.7 ± 10.5 | 27.6 ± 9.6 | 0.074 |
| Diastolic filling pattern (n, %) | 0.170 | |||
| Normal | 1, 2% | 1, 3% | 0, 0% | |
| Abnormal relaxation | 16, 28% | 14, 36% | 2, 10% | |
| Pseudonormal | 16, 28% | 10, 26% | 6, 32% | |
| Restrictive | 15, 26% | 8, 20% | 7, 37% | |
| Atrial fibrillation | 10, 17% | 6, 15% | 4, 21% | |
| Tissue Doppler derived-Tei index | ||||
| MCO (ms) | 414 ± 59 | 412 ± 49 | 418 ± 76 | 0.712 |
| ET (ms) | 246 ± 35 | 257 ± 29 | 223 ± 34 | <0.001 |
| Tei index | 0.70 ± 0.25 | 0.61 ± 0.16 | 0.89 ± 0.29 | 0.001 |
| IVCT (ms) | 79 ± 33 | 70 ± 20 | 96 ± 44 | 0.026 |
| IVRT (ms) | 92 ± 27 | 88 ± 24 | 98 ± 31 | 0.185 |
| Longitudinal systolic and diastolic deformation | ||||
| GLSsys (%) | −10.7 ± 4.3 | −12.1 ± 3.6 | −8.3 ± 4.6 | 0.001 |
| GLSRsys (S− 1) | −0.72 ± 0.29 | −0.80 ± 0.26 | −0.60 ± 0.32 | 0.013 |
| Septal LSsysapi/bas | 3.09 (2.10–4.64) | 2.64 (1.99–4.03) | 3.36 (2.90–5.68) | 0.062 |
| GLSRdias (S− 1) | 0.79 ± 0.35 | 0.87 ± 0.30 | 0.67 ± 0.40 | 0.039 |
| E/GLSRdias | 1.21 (0.84–1.59) | 1.00 (0.76–1.39) | 1.65 (0.96–2.44) | 0.004 |
LV-EDD left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, IVSd end-diastolic interventricular septal wall thickness, LV-PWd end-diastolic left ventricular posterior wall thickness, LV-FS fractional shortening, LV-EF ejection fraction, SV stroke volume, MAPSE mitral annular plane systolic excursion, LA left atrial, E peak early diastolic mitral inflow velocity, E/A peak early to late diastolic mitral inflow velocity ratio, DT deceleration time of E wave, E/E′ peak early diastolic mitral inflow velocity to tissue Doppler mitral annular velocity ratio, MCO mitral valve closure-to-opening time, ET ejection time, Tei index (MCO-ET)/ET, IVCT isovolumetric contract time, IVRT isovolumetric relaxation time, GLS global longitudinal systolic strain, GLSR global longitudinal systolic strain rate, LSsys The ratio between apical and basal LS of the septum, GLSR global early diastolic strain rate, E/GLSR peak early diastolic mitral inflow velocity to global early diastolic strain rate ratio
Cox proportional hazard regression for 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with light-chain cardiac amyloidosis
| Hazard ratio (95% confidence interval), adjusted for age, gender and BMI | P value | |
|---|---|---|
| NYHA class III–IV vs. I–II | 6.55 (1.89–22.75) | 0.003 |
| LV-FS (%) | 0.91 (0.86–0.97) | 0.002 |
| LV-EF (%) | 0.95 (0.91–0.99) | 0.009 |
| Septal MAPSE (mm) | 0.73 (0.58–0.91) | 0.006 |
| DT (ms) | 0.98 (0.97–0.99) | 0.002 |
| E/E′ | 1.05 (1.00–1.10) | 0.038 |
| ET (ms) | 0.98 (0.96–0.99) | 0.001 |
| IVCT (ms) | 1.01 (1.01–1.02) | 0.002 |
| Tei index | 47.04 (7.79–284.10) | <0.001 |
| Tei index ≥0.9 vs. <0.9 | 8.48 (3.27–21.99) | <0.001 |
| GLSsys (%) | 1.18 (1.06–1.33) | 0.004 |
| GLSRsys (S− 1) | 8.33 (1.55–44.78) | 0.014 |
| Septal LSsysapi/bas | 1.36 (0.83–2.23) | 0.223 |
| GLSRdias (S− 1) | 0.24 (0.06–1.01) | 0.051 |
| E/GLSRdias | 1.92 (1.19–3.08) | 0.007 |
| Model including Tei index, NYHA class and other conventional echocardiographic variables | ||
| NYHA class III–IV vs. I–II | 6.79 (1.27–36.39) | 0.025 |
| LV-EF (%) | 1.04 (0.96–1.13) | 0.309 |
| Septal MAPSE (mm) | 0.85 (0.68–1.06) | 0.153 |
| E/E′ | 0.99 (0.92–1.06) | 0.788 |
| Tei index ≥0.9 vs. <0.9 | 12.33 (2.92–52.04) | 0.001 |
| Model including Tei index and deformation variables | ||
| GLSsys ≤13% vs. >13% | 3.88 (0.84–17.93) | 0.082 |
| E/GLSRdias ≥2.0 vs. <2.0 | 1.44 (0.48–4.35) | 0.517 |
| Tei index ≥0.9 vs. <0.9 | 7.01 (2.43–20.21) | <0.001 |
Abbreviations as in Tables 1 and 2
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier estimation of Tei index, GLSsys, and E/GLSRdias for predicting all-cause mortality in patients with light-chain cardiac amyloidosis (AL-CA). Note that increased Tei index (a ≥0.9, P < 0.001), reduced GLSsys (b ≤13%, p = 0.019), or increased E/GLSRdias ratio (c ≥2.0, P < 0.001) was associated with significantly increased risk of all-cause death within 1 year in patients with AL-CA. GLS global longitudinal systolic strain, E/GLSR peak early diastolic mitral inflow velocity to global early diastolic strain rate ratio
Model performance statistics for Tei index and deformation predictors related 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with light-chain cardiac amyloidosis
| Overall performance | Discrimination (ROC, c-statistic) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Nagelkerke R² | c-statistic (95% CI) | P value | |
| Tei index | 0.40 | 0.85 (0.74–0.95) | <0.001 |
| GLSsys (%) | 0.29 | 0.77 (0.64–0.90) | 0.001 |
| E/LSRdias | 0.22 | 0.72 (0.58–0.87) | 0.007 |
| Tei index + GLSsys (%) | 0.45 | 0.87 (0.76–0.97) | <0.001 |
| Tei index + E/GLSRdias | 0.45 | 0.87 (0.77–0.97) | <0.001 |
| GLSsys (%) + E/GLSRdias | 0.32 | 0.77 (0.63–0.90) | 0.001 |
Abbreviations as in Table 2
Fig. 3Comparison of prognostic performance of Tei index ≥0.9 and GLSsys ≤13% in patients with light-chain cardiac amyloidosis. Scatter plots depicting the correct and wrong attribution of having died after 1 year of follow-up using certain thresholds derived from study data. Excellent prognostic performance for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality is observed using Tei index ≥0.9 plus GLSsys ≤13% with a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 47%. GLS global longitudinal systolic strain, Sp specificity, Se sensitivity
Fig. 4Comparison of prognostic performance of Tei index between light-chain cardiac amyloidosis patients with NYHA class I–II and III–IV. Note that in patients with NYHA class I–II, a significantly increased Tei index (≥0.9) was present in none (0/20) of survivors, but in 25% (2/8) of non-survivors (p = 0.074). Conversely, in patients with NYHA class III–IV, a normal Tei index (<0.5) was found in 18.2% (2/11) of survivors and in 26.3% (5/19) of non-survivors (p > 0.05). NYHA class New York Heart Association functional class