BACKGROUND: Two-dimensional speckle strain (2D STE) echocardiography can aid in the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and chronic coronary artery disease (CAD). HYPOTHESIS: Differences occur in the prediction of cardiac events using 2D STE in AMI vs CAD patients. METHODS: In this prospective study, 94 patients with a first AMI and successful revascularization, and 137 patients with stable CAD after complete revascularization were included. In all patients, we performed echocardiography and myocardial deformation analysis for layer-specific global circumferential strain (GCS) and longitudinal strain. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to predict the presence of a cardiac event using strain values and baseline characteristics in different regression models. RESULTS: Patients were followed for 3.6 ± 0.8 years. Strain parameters in AMI and CAD patients were significantly different with respect to the occurrence of a cardiac event. Frequency of diabetes and hypertension was associated with the presence of a cardiac event in CAD patients. Furthermore, in CAD patients, ROC analysis demonstrated that the addition of endocardial GCS to baseline characteristics and ejection fraction to a regression model significantly improved the prediction of cardiac events (area under curve = 0.86, cutoff value: 20%, sensitivity: 79%, specificity: 84%). In contrast, the addition of strain parameters in AMI patients did not increase the prediction power for cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS: Global strain parameters by 2D STE may be useful for the prediction of cardiac events in patients with CAD but add no supplemental information to baseline characteristic and ejection fraction in patients with AMI.
BACKGROUND: Two-dimensional speckle strain (2D STE) echocardiography can aid in the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and chronic coronary artery disease (CAD). HYPOTHESIS: Differences occur in the prediction of cardiac events using 2D STE in AMI vs CAD patients. METHODS: In this prospective study, 94 patients with a first AMI and successful revascularization, and 137 patients with stable CAD after complete revascularization were included. In all patients, we performed echocardiography and myocardial deformation analysis for layer-specific global circumferential strain (GCS) and longitudinal strain. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to predict the presence of a cardiac event using strain values and baseline characteristics in different regression models. RESULTS:Patients were followed for 3.6 ± 0.8 years. Strain parameters in AMI and CAD patients were significantly different with respect to the occurrence of a cardiac event. Frequency of diabetes and hypertension was associated with the presence of a cardiac event in CAD patients. Furthermore, in CAD patients, ROC analysis demonstrated that the addition of endocardial GCS to baseline characteristics and ejection fraction to a regression model significantly improved the prediction of cardiac events (area under curve = 0.86, cutoff value: 20%, sensitivity: 79%, specificity: 84%). In contrast, the addition of strain parameters in AMI patients did not increase the prediction power for cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS: Global strain parameters by 2D STE may be useful for the prediction of cardiac events in patients with CAD but add no supplemental information to baseline characteristic and ejection fraction in patients with AMI.
Authors: M A Quiñones; B H Greenberg; H A Kopelen; C Koilpillai; M C Limacher; D M Shindler; B J Shelton; D H Weiner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Marina Leitman; Peter Lysyansky; Stanislav Sidenko; Vladimir Shir; Eli Peleg; Michal Binenbaum; Edo Kaluski; Ricardo Krakover; Zvi Vered Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Sharon Ann Hunt; William T Abraham; Marshall H Chin; Arthur M Feldman; Gary S Francis; Theodore G Ganiats; Mariell Jessup; Marvin A Konstam; Donna M Mancini; Keith Michl; John A Oates; Peter S Rahko; Marc A Silver; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Clyde W Yancy; Elliott M Antman; Sidney C Smith; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; David P Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Alice K Jacobs; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-09-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Carissa G Fonseca; Ajith M Dissanayake; Robert N Doughty; Gillian A Whalley; Greg D Gamble; Brett R Cowan; Christopher J Occleshaw; Alistair A Young Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-12-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Timo Baks; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Elena Biagini; Piotr Wielopolski; Nico R Mollet; Filippo Cademartiri; Willem J van der Giessen; Gabriel P Krestin; Patrick W Serruys; Dirk J Duncker; Pim J de Feyter Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-12-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jacob E Møller; Graham S Hillis; Jae K Oh; Guy S Reeder; Bernard J Gersh; Patricia A Pellikka Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: W Patricia Ingkanisorn; Kenneth L Rhoads; Anthony H Aletras; Peter Kellman; Andrew E Arai Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-06-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Boaz D Rosen; Mohammed F Saad; Steven Shea; Khurram Nasir; Thor Edvardsen; Gregory Burke; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Donna K Arnett; Shenghan Lai; David A Bluemke; João A C Lima Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-02-23 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Lingyu Xu; Joseph J Pagano; Mark J Haykowksy; Justin A Ezekowitz; Gavin Y Oudit; Yoko Mikami; Andrew Howarth; James A White; Jason R B Dyck; Todd Anderson; D Ian Paterson; Richard B Thompson Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Maria Concetta Pastore; Giulia Elena Mandoli; Francesco Contorni; Luna Cavigli; Marta Focardi; Flavio D'Ascenzi; Giuseppe Patti; Sergio Mondillo; Matteo Cameli Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 3.411