Yang Hong, Marwick Thomas H, Fukuda Nobuaki, Oe Hiroki, Saito Makoto, Thomas James D, Negishi Kazuaki
Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
National Hospital Organization Takasaki General Medical Center, Takasaki, Japan.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015 Jun;28(6):642-8.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2014.12.009. Epub 2015 Jan 27.
Disagreement of strain measurements among different vendors has provided an obstacle to the clinical use of strain. A joint standardization task force between professional societies and industry was initiated to reduce intervendor variability of strain. Although feedback from this process has been used in software upgrades, little is known about the effects of efforts to improve conformity. The aim of this study was to assess whether intervendor agreement for global longitudinal strain (GLS) has improved after standardization initiatives.
Eighty-two subjects (mean age, 52 ± 21 years; 55% men) prospectively underwent two sequential examinations using two most common ultrasound systems (Vivid E9 and iE33). GLS was calculated using proprietary software (EchoPAC-PC BT12 [E12] and BT13 [E13] vs QLAB version 8.0 [Q8], QLAB version 9.0 [Q9], and QLAB version 10.0 [Q10]). Agreements in GLS were evaluated with Bland-Altman plots. Coefficients of variation (CVs) were compared using the Friedman test and compared with CVs of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction (LVEF).
Median GLS using E12 was -19.2% (interquartile range [IQR], -15.2% to -23.2%), compared with -19.3% (IQR, -14.9% to -23.7%) for E13, -15.7% (IQR, -11.4% to -20%) for Q8, -19% (IQR, -15.7% to -22.3%) for Q9, and -18.7% (IQR, -15.7% to -21.7%) for Q10. The CVs of prestandardization GLS (12 ± 8% [E12/Q8] and 14 ± 8 [E13/Q8]) were significantly larger than that of LVEF (5 ± 5) (P < .001). Since standardization, the CVs of GLS have shown improvement (6 ± 4 [E12/Q9], 7 ± 4 [E12/Q10], 6 ± 4 [E13/Q9], and 7 ± 4 [E13/Q10]) and are similar to those of LVEF.
Subsequent to the joint standardization task force, there has been improvement in between-vendor concordance in GLS between two leading ultrasound manufactures, the variability of which is now analogous to that of LVEF. The removal of concerns about measurement variability should allow wider use of GLS.
不同供应商之间应变测量结果存在差异,这给应变在临床中的应用带来了障碍。专业学会和行业之间发起了一个联合标准化工作组,以减少供应商之间应变测量结果的变异性。尽管这一过程中的反馈已被用于软件升级,但对于提高一致性所做努力的效果却知之甚少。本研究的目的是评估标准化举措后,全球纵向应变(GLS)在供应商之间的一致性是否有所改善。
82名受试者(平均年龄52±21岁;55%为男性)前瞻性地使用两种最常用的超声系统(Vivid E9和iE33)进行了两次连续检查。使用专有软件(EchoPAC-PC BT12 [E12]和BT13 [E13]与QLAB 8.0版[Q8]、QLAB 9.0版[Q9]和QLAB 10.0版[Q10])计算GLS。用Bland-Altman图评估GLS的一致性。使用Friedman检验比较变异系数(CV),并与左心室容积和射血分数(LVEF)的CV进行比较。
使用E12测得的GLS中位数为-19.2%(四分位间距[IQR],-15.2%至-23.2%),E13为-19.3%(IQR,-14.9%至-23.7%),Q8为-15.7%(IQR,-11.4%至-20%),Q9为-19%(IQR,-15.7%至-22.3%),Q10为-18.7%(IQR,-15.7%至-21.7%)。标准化前GLS的CV(E12/Q8为12±8%,E13/Q8为14±8)显著大于LVEF的CV(5±5)(P<.001)。自标准化以来,GLS的CV有所改善(E12/Q9为6±4,E12/Q10为7±4,E13/Q9为6±4,E13/Q10为7±4),且与LVEF的CV相似。
在联合标准化工作组之后,两家领先超声制造商之间GLS的供应商间一致性有所改善,其变异性现在与LVEF的变异性相似。消除对测量变异性的担忧应会使GLS得到更广泛的应用。