Kong Ling-Yun, Wang Xiu-Juan, Chen Ling-Ling, Xiang Wei, Liu Fang
Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, School of Clinical Medicine, Tsinghua Medicine, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2025 Aug 26;12:1612962. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1612962. eCollection 2025.
Evaluation of left ventricular (LV) global systolic function is clinically important for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, the rhythm irregularity inherent to AF poses challenges for assessing novel LV systolic function parameters, such as global myocardial work (MW). This study aimed to validate the feasibility of using the single index beat method to quantify LV MW during echocardiography in patients with AF, compared with the traditional 10-beat average method.
A prospective study was performed in 120 patients with AF at the time of the index echocardiography. Global longitudinal strain was assessed using speckle tracking echocardiography from a triplane dataset, followed by MW analysis to calculate global myocardial work index (GWI), global constructive work (GCW), global wasted work (GWW), and global work efficiency (GWE). A total of 10 consecutive beats were evaluated, with both the average value and the maximal difference among the 10 beats recorded. The index beat was defined as on in which the ratio of the preceding to the pre-preceding R-R interval was approximately 1 (0.96-1.04). MW parameters from the index beat were extracted for analysis. Inter-method consistency was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) with a single-rater, absolute agreement, two-way random effects model. Inter- and intra-observer reproducibility was also assessed.
Global MW derived from the index beat was comparable with the average of 10 beats: GWI, 1,157.19 ± 416.83 vs. 1,188.98 ± 452.96 mmHg% ( < 0.05); GCW, 1,721.46 ± 524.69 vs. 1,732.46 ± 524.24 mmHg% ( > 0.05); GWW, 237.95 (183.60) vs. 207.50 (207.25) mmHg% ( < 0.001); and GWE, 85.80% (11.05) vs. 86.50% (12.75) ( < 0.001). Consistency analysis showed that ICCs for all assessed MW parameters were >0.87. Satisfactory inter- and intra-observer reproducibility of the measurements by the index beat method was also found.
Global MW measured using the index beat method demonstrated good agreement with the average over 10 beats in patients with AF, supporting its reliability as a surrogate for the traditional method in clinical practice.
评估左心室(LV)整体收缩功能对房颤(AF)患者具有重要临床意义;然而,房颤固有的节律不规整给评估左心室收缩功能新参数带来了挑战,如整体心肌做功(MW)。本研究旨在验证在房颤患者超声心动图检查期间使用单搏法量化左心室MW的可行性,并与传统的10搏平均值法进行比较。
对120例在首次超声心动图检查时患有房颤的患者进行了一项前瞻性研究。使用斑点追踪超声心动图从三平面数据集评估整体纵向应变,随后进行MW分析以计算整体心肌做功指数(GWI)、整体建设性做功(GCW)、整体废用做功(GWW)和整体做功效率(GWE)。共评估连续10个心动周期,记录这10个心动周期的平均值和最大差值。将索引心动周期定义为前一个R-R间期与前前一个R-R间期之比约为1(0.96-1.04)的心动周期。提取索引心动周期的MW参数进行分析。使用单评分者、绝对一致性、双向随机效应模型的组内相关系数(ICC)评估方法间的一致性。还评估了观察者间和观察者内的可重复性。
索引心动周期得出的整体MW与10个心动周期的平均值相当:GWI,1157.19±416.83与1188.98±452.96mmHg%(P<0.05);GCW,1721.46±524.69与1732.46±524.24mmHg%(P>0.05);GWW,237.95(183.60)与207.50(207.25)mmHg%(P<0.001);GWE,85.80%(11.05)与86.50%(12.75)(P<0.001)。一致性分析表明,所有评估的MW参数的ICC均>0.87。还发现索引心动周期法测量的观察者间和观察者内可重复性令人满意。
在房颤患者中,使用索引心动周期法测量的整体MW与10个心动周期的平均值具有良好的一致性,支持其在临床实践中作为传统方法替代指标的可靠性。