Premium
Correlation and agreement between 2D and 3D speckle‐tracking echocardiography for left ventricular volumetric, strain, and rotational parameters in healthy volunteers and in patients with mild mitral stenosis
Author(s) -
Poyraz Esra,
Kemaloglu Oz Tugba,
Çetin Güvenç Rengin,
Guvenc Tolga Sinan
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
echocardiography
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.404
H-Index - 62
eISSN - 1540-8175
pISSN - 0742-2822
DOI - 10.1111/echo.14336
Subject(s) - medicine , speckle tracking echocardiography , cardiology , strain (injury) , correlation , nuclear medicine , ejection fraction , heart failure , mathematics , geometry
Background Recent advances had allowed measurement of myocardial deformation parameters using 3D speckle‐tracking echocardiography ( STE ). Agreement between these two modalities and interchangeability of findings remain as an issue since 2 DSTE is more widely available than 3 DSTE . The aim of this study was to investigate the correlation and agreement between 2 DSTE and 3 DSTE in healthy volunteers and in patients with mild mitral stenosis ( MS ). Methods Data from 31 patients with mild MS and 27 healthy volunteers were included in this study. Data were analyzed for the correlation and agreement between 2 DSTE and 3 DSTE for volumetric, strain, and rotational parameters. Results There were no significant differences between 2 DSTE and 3 DSTE in both control and MS groups for left ventricular volumetric and rotational parameters. 3D global longitudinal strain ( GLS ) and global circumferential strain ( GCS ) were significantly higher in healthy volunteers ( P < 0.001 for both), while only 3 DGCS was significantly higher than 2 DGCS in MS group ( P < 0.001). The correlation between 3 DSTE and 2 DSTE was weak‐to‐moderate in both groups for strain and rotational parameters, and overall, correlation coefficients were higher in MS group. An exception was GLS in MS group, where coefficient of correlation was excellent ( r = 0.907). Agreement between two modalities was poor for strain and rotational parameters, and the average bias was high. Conclusions Overall, the agreement between 2 DSTE and 3 DSTE for strain and rotational measures was poor with a high average bias. The agreement between 2 DSTE and 3 DSTE is affected by the presence of underlying MS and the direction of strain.