English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) enables objective assessment of left atrial (LA) deformation through the analysis of myocardial strain, which can be measured by different speckle-tracking software. The aim of this study was to compare the consistency of 3 different commercially available software, which include vendor-specific software for measuring left ventricle (VSS LV ), vendor-independent software packages for measuring LV strain (VIS LV ) and vendor-independent software packages for measuring LA strain (VIS LA ).    Methods  Sixty-four subjects (mean age: 44 ± 16 years, 50% males) underwent conventional echocardiograms using a GE Vivid 9 (GE Ultrasound, Horten, Norway) cardiac ultrasound system. Standard apical 4 and 2 chamber views of the left atrium were obtained in each subject with a frame-rate range of 40–71 frames/s. LA strain during the contraction phase (Sct), conduit phase (Scd), reservoir phase (Sr = Sct + Scd) were analyzed by 2 independent observers and 3 different software.    Results  Sct, Scd, Sr were, respectively, − 11.26 ± 2.45%, − 16.77 ± 7.06%, and 28.03 ± 7.58% with VSS LV , − 14.77 ± 3.59%, − 23.17 ± 10.33%, and 38.23 ± 10.99% with VIS LV , and − 14.80 ± 3.88%, − 23.94 ± 10.48%, and 38.73 ± 11.56% when VIS LA  was used. A comparison of strain measurements between VSS LV  and VIS (VIS LV  and VIS LA ) showed VIS had significantly smaller mean differences and narrower limits of agreement. Similar results were observed in the coefficient of variation (CV) for measurements between VSS LV  and VIS (VIS LV  and VIS LA ). Comparison of the intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) indicated that measurement reliability was weaker with VSS LV  (ICC < 0.6) than with VIS (VIS LV  and VIS LA ) (ICC > 0.9). For intra-observer ICCs, VIS LA  > VSS LV  = VIS LV . For inter-observer ICCs, VSS LV  > VIS LA  > VIS LV .    Conclusions  Software measurement results of LA strain vary considerably. We recommended not measuring LA strain across vendor platforms.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (10.1186/s12947-019-0158-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Left atrial strain reproducibility using vendor-dependent and vendor-independent software