| Literature DB >> 31601248 |
Tomas Zaremba1, Bhupendar Tayal2, Sam Riahi2,3, Anna Margrethe Thøgersen2, Niels Eske Bruun3,4,5, Kasper Janus Grønn Emerek3, Joseph Kisslo6, Thomas Fritz Hansen7, Niels Risum8, Peter Søgaard2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nearly one-third of heart failure (HF) patients do not respond to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) despite having left bundle branch block (LBBB). The aim of the study was to investigate a novel method of quantifying left ventricular (LV) contractile asymmetry in HF.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Contractile asymmetry; Heart failure; Strain rate
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31601248 PMCID: PMC6788085 DOI: 10.1186/s12947-019-0170-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound ISSN: 1476-7120 Impact factor: 2.062
Fig. 1Extraction of strain rate values data from the curved anatomical M-mode plot
Fig. 2Flowchart of the calculation of index of contractile asymmetry (ICA). Left upper panel: the original curved anatomical M-mode (CAMM) plot of pre-implantation systolic strain rate in an apical four-chamber view in a responder to CRT. The strain rate values contained in the CAMM plot are converted to a table (matrix). ICA is then calculated as standard deviation of the differences in strain rate in two opposing left ventricular walls (here, septum and lateral wall). Left lower panel: scale used in the graphical representation of the strain rate tables (matrices). Right lower panel: density plot of the differences in strain rate between the two walls. In this case, ICA in four-chamber view is 0.97 s− 1. 4ch, four-chamber view; CAMM, curved anatomical M-mode; SD, standard deviation
Fig. 3Division of left ventricle into 12 sectors. The circle represents left ventricle (LV) from the bull’s-eye view. The dashed line depicts right ventricle. Zero degrees correspond to the LV anterior wall in the two-chamber view. RV, right ventricle; 2ch, two-chamber view; 3ch, three-chamber view; 4ch, four-chamber view
Baseline characteristics
| All subjects ( | Responders ( | Non-responders ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, yrs | 68 ± 9 | 67 ± 10 | 71 ± 8 | 0.05 |
| Female, n (%) | 33 (37.1) | 27 (40.9) | 6 (26.1) | 0.32 |
| Ischemic etiology, n (%) | 54 (61) | 38 (57.6) | 16 (69.6) | 0.34 |
| NYHA-class | 1 | |||
| I, n (%) | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.5) | 0 (0) | |
| II, n (%) | 30 (33.7) | 23 (34.8) | 7 (30.4) | |
| III, n (%) | 58 (65.2) | 43 (65.2) | 15 (65.2) | |
| ACEI/ARB, n (%) | 87 (97.8) | 64 (97) | 23 (100) | 0.99 |
| Beta-blockers, n (%) | 85 (95.5) | 63 (95.5) | 22 (95.7) | 0.99 |
| Loop diuretics, n (%) | 58 (65.2) | 40 (60.6) | 18 (78.3) | 0.2 |
| Aldosterone antagonists, n (%) | 49 (55.1) | 35 (53) | 14 (60.9) | 0.63 |
| Statins, n (%) | 63 (70.8) | 45 (68.2) | 18 (78.3) | 0.43 |
| eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2, n (%) | 38 (42.7) | 24 (36.4) | 14 (60.9) | 0.05 |
| LVESV, ml | 132.4 ± 52.9 | 131.9 ± 56.6 | 133.9 ± 41.3 | 0.86 |
| LVEF, % | 27.1 ± 7.1 | 27.3 ± 6.9 | 26.6 ± 7.7 | 0.7 |
| GLS, % | −9.5 ± 3.4 | −9.7 ± 3.7 | −8.7 ± 2.5 | 0.12 |
| Mechanical dispersion, ms | 97 ± 32 | 97 ± 32 | 96 ± 34 | 0.95 |
| QRS duration, ms | 163 ± 20 | 163 ± 18 | 162 ± 26 | 0.83 |
ACEI Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, ARB Angiotensin II receptor blockers, EF Ejection fraction, eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate, ESV End-systolic volume, GLS Global longitudinal strain, LV left ventricle, NYHA New York Heart Association; *, p < 0.05
Fig. 4CRT response by ICA in each LV sector. Left upper panel: Baseline ICA in CRT responders vs. non-responders. Right upper panel: Reduction of ICA4 as a function of baseline ICA4. Left lower panel: Reduction of ICA after CRT stratified by the severity of the baseline ICA4. Right lower panel: Reduction of ICA after CRT in the subgroup of patients with a low baseline contractile asymmetry (ICA4 < 0.7 s− 1). ICA, index of contractile asymmetry; ICA4, index of contractile asymmetry in LV sector 4; CRT, cardiac resynchronization therapy; LV, left ventricle; r, Pearson’s r; *, p < 0.05
Fig. 5Baseline ICA and reduction of ICA around the left ventricle after CRT. Left panel: Mean baseline ICA in CRT responders, non-responders, and controls in each degree around the LV. Digits 1 to 6 represent the LV sectors. Right panel: Mean relative reduction of ICA after CRT. Abbreviations as in Figs. 3 and 4
Index of contractile asymmetry in standard apical views and six left ventricular sectors at baseline
| All subjects ( | Responders ( | Non-responders ( | Controls ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Two-chamber view, s− 1 | 0.52 ± 0.14 | 0.53 ± 0.15 | 0.48 ± 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.45 ± 0.13 | 0.6 |
| Three-chamber view, s−1 | 0.71 ± 0.25 | 0.78 ± 0.23 | 0.51 ± 0.15 | < 0.0001* | 0.49 ± 0.12 | 0.66 |
| Four-chamber view, s−1 | 0.75 ± 0.25 | 0.79 ± 0.25 | 0.62 ± 0.18 | < 0.001* | 0.42 ± 0.11 | < 0.001* |
| ICA1, s−1 | 0.58 ± 0.18 | 0.61 ± 0.19 | 0.52 ± 0.16 | 0.03* | 0.44 ± 0.12 | 0.12 |
| ICA2, s−1 | 0.7 ± 0.23 | 0.74 ± 0.24 | 0.59 ± 0.18 | 0.002* | 0.41 ± 0.11 | 0.002* |
| ICA3, s−1 | 0.76 ± 0.25 | 0.81 ± 0.24 | 0.6 ± 0.19 | < 0.0001* | 0.41 ± 0.08 | < 0.001* |
| ICA4, s−1 | 0.75 ± 0.26 | 0.83 ± 0.24 | 0.55 ± 0.18 | < 0.0001* | 0.46 ± 0.09 | 0.08 |
| ICA5, s−1 | 0.56 ± 0.18 | 0.61 ± 0.18 | 0.41 ± 0.1 | < 0.0001* | 0.43 ± 0.13 | 0.76 |
| ICA6, s−1 | 0.42 ± 0.1 | 0.44 ± 0.11 | 0.39 ± 0.1 | 0.07 | 0.4 ± 0.13 | 0.89 |
ICA Index of contractile asymmetry; *, p < 0.05; †, responders vs. non-responders; ‡, non-responders vs. controls
Fig. 6Linear regression of ICA4 and relative reduction of LVESV after CRT. Left panel: Reduction of LVESV after CRT as a function of baseline ICA4. Right panel: Reduction of LVESV after CRT as a function of reduction of ICA4. ESV, end-systolic volume. Other abbreviations as in Fig. 4
Relative reduction of ICA after CRT
| All subjects ( | Responders ( | Non-responders ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Two-chamber view, % | −4 ± 38 | −4 ± 39 | −2 ± 39 | 0.61 |
| Three-chamber view, % | −24 ± 38 | −35 ± 29 | 8 ± 43 | < 0.0001* |
| Four-chamber view, % | −28 ± 34 | −33 ± 30 | −14 ± 43 | 0.04* |
| ICA1, % | −14 ± 35 | −16 ± 35 | −8 ± 37 | 0.39 |
| ICA2, % | −26 ± 33 | −30 ± 30 | −14 ± 41 | 0.06 |
| ICA3, % | −31 ± 31 | −37 ± 26 | −13 ± 39 | 0.005* |
| ICA4, % | −29 ± 34 | −39 ± 24 | 1 ± 41 | < 0.0001* |
| ICA5, % | −18 ± 37 | −28 ± 29 | 12 ± 42 | < 0.0001* |
| ICA6, % | 1 ± 33 | −1 ± 31 | 6 ± 40 | 0.57 |
ICA index of contractile asymmetry; *, p < 0.05
Logistic regression of predictors of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy
| Odds ratio (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Univariable analysis | ||
| Age | 0.95 (0.9–1) | 0.07 |
| Male sex | 0.51 (0.17–1.4) | 0.21 |
| eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 | 0.37 (0.13–0.96) | 0.04* |
| QRS duration | 1 (0.98–1.03) | 0.79 |
| Ischemic etiology | 0.59 (0.2–1.59) | 0.31 |
| Time to peak ≥ 130 ms | 1.01 (0.34–2.76) | 0.99 |
| LBBB pattern | 4.05 (1.49–11.4) | 0.007* |
| ICA4 ≥ 0.7 s− 1 | 10.2 (3.35–38.5) | < 0.001* |
| Multivariable model 1 | ||
| Age | 0.95 (0.89–1.01) | 0.1 |
| eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 | 0.45 (0.15–1.26) | 0.13 |
| LBBB pattern | 4.44 (1.54–13.6) | 0.007* |
| Multivariable model 2 | ||
| Age | 0.95 (0.89–1.01) | 0.12 |
| eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 | 0.55 (0.18–1.69) | 0.3 |
| ICA4 ≥ 0.7 s−1 | 10.1 (3.2–40) | < 0.001* |
ICA4 Index of contractile asymmetry in left ventricular sector 4, eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate, GLS Global longitudinal strain, LBBB Left bundle branch block; *, p < 0.05