Suppr超能文献

改善心房颤动患者心力衰竭的诊断。

Improving the diagnosis of heart failure in patients with atrial fibrillation.

机构信息

Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Cardiology Department, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.

出版信息

Heart. 2021 Jun;107(11):902-908. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318557. Epub 2021 Mar 10.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To improve the echocardiographic assessment of heart failure in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) by comparing conventional averaging of consecutive beats with an index-beat approach, whereby measurements are taken after two cycles with similar R-R interval.

METHODS

Transthoracic echocardiography was performed using a standardised and blinded protocol in patients enrolled in the RATE-AF (RAte control Therapy Evaluation in permanent Atrial Fibrillation) randomised trial. We compared reproducibility of the index-beat and conventional consecutive-beat methods to calculate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), global longitudinal strain (GLS) and E/e' (mitral E wave max/average diastolic tissue Doppler velocity), and assessed intraoperator/interoperator variability, time efficiency and validity against natriuretic peptides.

RESULTS

160 patients were included, 46% of whom were women, with a median age of 75 years (IQR 69-82) and a median heart rate of 100 beats per minute (IQR 86-112). The index-beat had the lowest within-beat coefficient of variation for LVEF (32%, vs 51% for 5 consecutive beats and 53% for 10 consecutive beats), GLS (26%, vs 43% and 42%) and E/e' (25%, vs 41% and 41%). Intraoperator (n=50) and interoperator (n=18) reproducibility were both superior for index-beats and this method was quicker to perform (p<0.001): 35.4 s to measure E/e' (95% CI 33.1 to 37.8) compared with 44.7 s for 5-beat (95% CI 41.8 to 47.5) and 98.1 s for 10-beat (95% CI 91.7 to 104.4) analyses. Using a single index-beat did not compromise the association of LVEF, GLS or E/e' with natriuretic peptide levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with averaging of multiple beats in patients with AF, the index-beat approach improves reproducibility and saves time without a negative impact on validity, potentially improving the diagnosis and classification of heart failure in patients with AF.

摘要

目的

通过比较传统的连续心跳平均法和指数心跳法,改善心房颤动(AF)患者心力衰竭的超声心动图评估。指数心跳法是指在两次相似 R-R 间期后测量,从而获取测量值。

方法

采用标准化、盲法方案,对 RATE-AF(永久性心房颤动的速率控制治疗评估)随机试验中纳入的患者进行经胸超声心动图检查。我们比较了指数心跳法和传统连续心跳法测量左心室射血分数(LVEF)、整体纵向应变(GLS)和 E/e'(二尖瓣 E 波最大/平均舒张组织多普勒速度)的重复性,并评估了操作者内/操作者间变异性、时间效率以及与利钠肽的有效性。

结果

共纳入 160 例患者,其中 46%为女性,中位年龄为 75 岁(IQR 69-82),中位心率为 100 次/分钟(IQR 86-112)。指数心跳法测量 LVEF、GLS 和 E/e'的组内变异系数最低(分别为 32%、26%和 25%),而 5 次连续心跳法分别为 51%、43%和 41%,10 次连续心跳法分别为 53%、42%和 41%。指数心跳法的操作者内(n=50)和操作者间(n=18)重复性均优于连续心跳法,且该方法耗时更短(p<0.001):测量 E/e'需要 35.4 秒(95%CI 33.1 秒至 37.8 秒),而 5 次连续心跳法需要 44.7 秒(95%CI 41.8 秒至 47.5 秒),10 次连续心跳法需要 98.1 秒(95%CI 91.7 秒至 104.4 秒)。使用单个指数心跳法并不影响 LVEF、GLS 或 E/e'与利钠肽水平的相关性。

结论

与在 AF 患者中使用多心跳平均法相比,指数心跳法提高了重复性并节省了时间,而不会对有效性产生负面影响,从而可能改善 AF 患者心力衰竭的诊断和分类。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/96cc/8142420/fa3b68421854/heartjnl-2020-318557f01.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验