Torres Marco A R, Texeira Thais F, Camarozano Ana C, Bellagamba Clarissa C A, Quevedo Natalia M, Junior Altair I Heidemann, Bertoluci Carolina, Bombardini Tonino, De Nes Michele, Ciampi Quirino, Picano Eugenio
Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Hospital de Clinicas UFPR, Medicine Department, Federal University of Paranà, Curitiba, Brazil.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Jun;35(6):1019-1026. doi: 10.1007/s10554-019-01599-5. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
The peak stress/rest ratio of left ventricular (LV) elastance, or LV force, is a load-independent index of left ventricular contractile reserve (LVCR) with stress echo (SE). To assess the accuracy of LVCR calculated during SE with approaches of different complexity. Two-hundred-forty patients were referred to SE for known or suspected coronary artery disease or heart failure and, of those, 200 patients, age 61 ± 15, 99 females, with interpretable volumetric SE were enrolled. All readers had passed the upstream quality control reading for regional wall motion abnormality (RWMA) and end-systolic volume (ESV) measurement. The employed stress was dipyridamole (0.84 mg, 6 min) in 86 (43%) and dobutamine (up to 40 mcg/kg/min) in 114 (57%) patients. All underwent SE with evaluation of RWMA and simultaneous LVCR assessment with stress/rest ratio of LV force (systolic blood pressure by cuff sphygmomanometer/ESV). ESV was calculated in each patient by two of three methods: biplane Simpson rule (S, in 100 patients), single plane area-length (AL, apical four-chamber area and length, in 100 patients), and Teichholz rule (T, from parasternal long axis and/or short axis view, in 200 patients). RMWA were observed in 54 patients. Success rate for ESV measurement was 76% (100/131) for S, 92% (100/109) for AL, and 100% (240/240) for T. There were 100 paired measurements (rest and stress) with S versus T, and 100 with AL versus T. The analysis time was the shortest for T (33 ± 8 s at rest, 34 ± 7 s at stress), intermediate for AL (70 ± 22 s at rest 67 ± 21 s at stress), and the longest for S (136 ± 24 at rest 129 ± 27 s at stress, p < 0.05 vs. T and AL). ESV absolute values were moderately correlated: T versus S (r rest = 0.746, p < 0.01, n = 100; r stress = 0.794, p < 0.01, n = 100); T vs. AL (r = 0.603 p < 0.01, n = 100, at rest and r = 0.820 p < 0.01 n = 100 at peak stress). LVCR values were tightly correlated independently of the method employed: T versus S (r = 0.899, p < 0.01, n = 100), and T versus AL (r = 0.845, p < 0.01, n = 100). LVCR can be accurately determined with all three methods used to extract the raw values of ESV necessary to generate the calculation of Force. Although S is known to be more precise in determining absolute ESV values, the relative (rest-stress) changes can be assessed, with comparable accuracy, with simpler and more feasible T and AL methods, characterized by higher success rate, shorter imaging and analysis time.
左心室(LV)弹性或左心室力的峰值应力/静息比是通过应力超声心动图(SE)评估左心室收缩储备(LVCR)的一个与负荷无关的指标。为了评估在SE期间使用不同复杂程度的方法计算LVCR的准确性。240例因已知或疑似冠状动脉疾病或心力衰竭而接受SE检查的患者中,200例年龄为61±15岁、99例为女性且具有可解释的容积性SE的患者被纳入研究。所有阅片者均通过了上游关于室壁运动异常(RWMA)和收缩末期容积(ESV)测量的质量控制阅片。86例(43%)患者使用双嘧达莫(0.84mg,6分钟)作为负荷,114例(57%)患者使用多巴酚丁胺(最高40μg/kg/min)作为负荷。所有患者均接受SE检查,评估RWMA并同时通过左心室力的应力/静息比(袖带血压计测量的收缩压/ESV)评估LVCR。通过三种方法中的两种计算每位患者的ESV:双平面Simpson法则(S,100例患者)、单平面面积-长度法(AL,心尖四腔心面积和长度,100例患者)以及Teichholz法则(T,来自胸骨旁长轴和/或短轴视图,200例患者)。54例患者观察到RWMA。S法测量ESV的成功率为76%(100/131),AL法为92%(100/109),T法为100%(240/240)。有100对S与T的配对测量值(静息和负荷状态下),以及100对AL与T的配对测量值。分析时间T最短(静息时33±8秒,负荷时34±7秒),AL中等(静息时70±22秒,负荷时67±21秒),S最长(静息时136±24秒,负荷时129±27秒,与T和AL相比p<0.05)。ESV绝对值呈中度相关:T与S(静息时r=0.746,p<0.01,n=100;负荷时r=0.794,p<0.01,n=100);T与AL(静息时r=0.603,p<0.01,n=100,负荷峰值时r=0.820,p<0.01,n=100)。LVCR值紧密相关,与所采用的方法无关:T与S(r=0.899,p<0.01,n=100),以及T与AL(r=0.845,p<0.01,n=100)。使用用于提取生成力计算所需ESV原始值的所有三种方法均可准确测定LVCR。尽管已知S在确定绝对ESV值方面更精确,但相对(静息-负荷)变化可以通过更简单、更可行的T和AL方法以相当的准确性进行评估,这些方法具有更高的成功率、更短的成像和分析时间。