Department of Cardiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey.
Kardiol Pol. 2013;71(4):341-51. doi: 10.5603/KP.2013.0061.
Left atrial (LA) deformation analysis by two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) has recently been proposed as an alternative approach for estimating left ventricular (LV) filling pressure and dysfunction.
To assess the LA myocardial function using 2D-STE in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with preserved LV ejection fraction (PLVEF) and to evaluate the relationship of the obtained results with echocardiographically estimated pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (ePCWP).
Eighty-five ESRD patients and 60 healthy individuals were enrolled in the study. Images of the LA were acquired from apical two- and four-chamber views. The LA volumes (LAV) were calculated using the biplane area-length method. The LA volume indices (LAVI) were calculated by dividing the LA volumes by the body surface area. The LA strain (%) (LAS) parameters (systolic [LA(S-S)], early diastolic [LA(S-E)], late diastolic [LA(S-A)] during atrial contraction) were assessed, and the ePCWP was calculated according to the following formula: ePCWP = 1.25(E/E') + 1.9. LA stiffness was calculated non-invasively and based on the ratio of E/E' to LAS-S.
In patients with ESRD, the LA(S-S) (32.22 ± 7.64% vs. 57.93 ± 8.71%; p < 0.001), LA(S-E) (-15.86 ± 5.7% vs. -33.37 ± 7.71%; p < 0.001), and the LA(S-A) (-15.41 ± 4.16% vs. -24.57 ± 4.68%; p < 0.001) values were observed to be lower than the healthy group; while the LA stiffness (0.4 ± 0.19 vs. 0.17 ± 0.05; p < 0.001) value was higher. When the patients with ESRD were divided into two groups as those with a maximum LAVI value over 31.34 mL/m² and those with a maximum LAVI below this value, the LA(S-S) (30.36 ± 8.32% vs. 34.11 ± 6.43%; p = 0.023) and the LA(S-E) (-14.97 ± 5.88% vs. -16.76 ± 5.42%; p = 0.039) values were lower in the group with a LAVI value over 31.34 mL/m²; while the LA(S-A) (-16.06 ± 4.44% vs. -14.75 ± 3.8%; p < 0.001) and LA stiffness (0.4 ± 0.19 vs. 0.17 ± 0.05; p < 0.001) values were higher. An association was observed between the ePCWP and LA(S-S) (p < 0.001), LAS-E (p = 0.01), LA(S-A) (p < 0.001), and LA stiffness (p < 0.001) values.
The results of our study have demonstrated that LA myocardial function assessed using the 2D-STE method is associated with the ePCWP, which is an echocardiographically calculated marker of LV dysfunction. The LA deformation parameters may be used as echocardiographic findings to predict the LV dysfunction in ESRD patients with PLVEF. Further studies are needed to determine the independent prognostic power of the atrial strain measurement as a predictor of future cardiovascular events in ESRD patients.
二维斑点追踪超声心动图(2D-STE)最近被提出作为一种替代方法来估计左心室(LV)充盈压和功能障碍。
评估终末期肾病(ESRD)患者中左心房(LA)心肌功能,这些患者的左心室射血分数(LVEF)正常,并评估获得的结果与超声心动图估计的肺毛细血管楔压(ePCWP)之间的关系。
纳入 85 名 ESRD 患者和 60 名健康个体进行研究。从心尖两腔和四腔视图获取 LA 图像。使用双平面面积长度法计算 LA 容积(LAV)。通过将 LA 容积除以体表面积来计算 LA 容积指数(LAVI)。评估 LA 应变(%)(LA[S-S]、早期舒张[LA[S-E]、晚期舒张[LA[S-A]期间心房收缩)参数,并根据以下公式计算 ePCWP:ePCWP = 1.25(E/E')+1.9。根据 E/E'与 LA[S-S]的比值无创且基于 LA 僵硬度进行计算。
在 ESRD 患者中,LA[S-S](32.22 ± 7.64%比 57.93 ± 8.71%;p < 0.001)、LA[S-E](-15.86 ± 5.7%比-33.37 ± 7.71%;p < 0.001)和 LA[S-A](-15.41 ± 4.16%比-24.57 ± 4.68%;p < 0.001)值低于健康组;而 LA 僵硬度(0.4 ± 0.19 比 0.17 ± 0.05;p < 0.001)值更高。当将 ESRD 患者分为最大 LAVI 值超过 31.34 mL/m²和最大 LAVI 值低于此值的两组时,LA[S-S](30.36 ± 8.32%比 34.11 ± 6.43%;p = 0.023)和 LA[S-E](-14.97 ± 5.88%比-16.76 ± 5.42%;p = 0.039)值在 LAVI 值超过 31.34 mL/m²的组中较低;而 LA[S-A](-16.06 ± 4.44%比-14.75 ± 3.8%;p < 0.001)和 LA 僵硬度(0.4 ± 0.19 比 0.17 ± 0.05;p < 0.001)值更高。观察到 ePCWP 与 LA[S-S](p < 0.001)、LAS-E(p = 0.01)、LA[S-A](p < 0.001)和 LA 僵硬度(p < 0.001)值之间存在相关性。
我们的研究结果表明,使用 2D-STE 方法评估的 LA 心肌功能与 ePCWP 相关,后者是 LV 功能障碍的超声心动图计算标志物。LA 变形参数可作为超声心动图发现,用于预测 PLVEF 的 ESRD 患者的 LV 功能障碍。需要进一步研究以确定心房应变测量作为未来 ESRD 患者心血管事件预测指标的独立预后能力。