BACKGROUND: American and European societies recommend using left atrial (LA) volume adjusted to body surface area (BSA) as the means of indexing LA volume to the patient's body size irrespective of morphometric characteristics. AIM: To evaluate the impact of obesity on LA volume indexation to BSA on the presence and degree of LA enlargement. METHODS: From our echocardiography database, we extracted all consecutive adults referred for a transthoracic echocardiography in 2019 (n=28,725; 64±17 years; 55% male; 31% obese [body mass index≥30kg/m2]). LA volume indexed to BSA was calculated using measured weight (LAMeas) and ideal weight (LAIdeal) calculated using the Devine Formula. RESULTS: LAMeas and LAIdeal were 35±17mL/m2 and 40±19mL/m2, respectively (P<0.0001); 13% were classified as having a normal LAMeas but LAIdeal enlargement overall, 25% in obese patients and 7% in non-obese patients (P<0.0001). The percentages of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe LA dilatation were 57%, 19%, 9% and 16%, respectively, using LAMeas, and 45%, 20%, 11% and 24%, respectively, using LAIdeal (kappa=0.57). Degree of LA enlargement differed in 8194 patients (29%); 96% of the disagreement was related to underestimation of the degree of LA enlargement using LAMeas. Agreement for the degree of LA enlargement was poor in obese and good in non-obese patients (kappa=0.28 and 0.71, respectively). As illustrative clinical implications, diastolic function grade was modified in 8.3% of patients with preserved ejection fraction and 10.8% of patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction/myocardial disease, and timing for intervention was potentially different in 12.9% of patients with primary mitral regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Indexing LA volume to measured BSA versus ideal BSA markedly underestimates the presence and severity of LA enlargement, especially in obese patients, with potential important clinical implications.
BACKGROUND: American and European societies recommend using left atrial (LA) volume adjusted to body surface area (BSA) as the means of indexing LA volume to the patient's body size irrespective of morphometric characteristics. AIM: To evaluate the impact of obesity on LA volume indexation to BSA on the presence and degree of LA enlargement. METHODS: From our echocardiography database, we extracted all consecutive adults referred for a transthoracic echocardiography in 2019 (n=28,725; 64±17 years; 55% male; 31% obese [body mass index≥30kg/m2]). LA volume indexed to BSA was calculated using measured weight (LAMeas) and ideal weight (LAIdeal) calculated using the Devine Formula. RESULTS: LAMeas and LAIdeal were 35±17mL/m2 and 40±19mL/m2, respectively (P<0.0001); 13% were classified as having a normal LAMeas but LAIdeal enlargement overall, 25% in obesepatients and 7% in non-obesepatients (P<0.0001). The percentages of patients with no, mild, moderate and severe LA dilatation were 57%, 19%, 9% and 16%, respectively, using LAMeas, and 45%, 20%, 11% and 24%, respectively, using LAIdeal (kappa=0.57). Degree of LA enlargement differed in 8194 patients (29%); 96% of the disagreement was related to underestimation of the degree of LA enlargement using LAMeas. Agreement for the degree of LA enlargement was poor in obese and good in non-obesepatients (kappa=0.28 and 0.71, respectively). As illustrative clinical implications, diastolic function grade was modified in 8.3% of patients with preserved ejection fraction and 10.8% of patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction/myocardial disease, and timing for intervention was potentially different in 12.9% of patients with primary mitral regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Indexing LA volume to measured BSA versus ideal BSA markedly underestimates the presence and severity of LA enlargement, especially in obesepatients, with potential important clinical implications.