Systolic Function: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==The Left | ==The Left Ventricle== | ||
Each echocardiogram | Each echocardiogram should include an evaluation of the LV dimensions, wall thicknesses and function. | ||
Several (read: different) measurements have to be performed from different views to asses a good estimate of LV function. | |||
==Left ventricular systolic function== | ==Left ventricular systolic function== | ||
Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
{| class="wikitable" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="700px" | {| class="wikitable" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="700px" | ||
|- | |- | ||
!colspan="6"|Comparison of segmental Values (mean and SD) for LV strain (TQ<3), with a repeated measures design | !colspan="6"|Comparison of segmental Values (mean and SD) for LV strain (TQ<3), with a repeated measures design.<cite>2</cite> | ||
|- | |- | ||
! | ! | ||
Line 164: | Line 164: | ||
|align="center"|<0.0001 | |align="center"|<0.0001 | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="6"|*inferior was significantly different from other walls (p<0.001 except anterior p+0.002), in the comparison of walls at all levels.†Posterior was significantly different from all other walls (p<0.0001). In the comparison oflevels in all walls, each level was significantly different (p <0.0001). LV=left ventricular, TQ=tracking quality. | |colspan="6"|*inferior was significantly different from other walls (p<0.001 except anterior p+0.002), in the comparison of walls at all levels.†Posterior was significantly different from all other walls (p<0.0001). In the comparison oflevels in all walls, each level was significantly different (p <0.0001). LV=left ventricular, TQ=tracking quality. | ||
|} | |} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:08, 23 March 2023
The Left Ventricle
Each echocardiogram should include an evaluation of the LV dimensions, wall thicknesses and function.
Several (read: different) measurements have to be performed from different views to asses a good estimate of LV function.
Left ventricular systolic function
Left ventricular function
Women | Men | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reference range | Mildly abnormal | Moderately abnormal | Severely abnormal | Reference range | Mildly abnormal | Moderately abnormal | Severely abnormal | |
Linear method | ||||||||
Wallmotion score index | 1.0 | 1.0-1.5 | 1.5-2.0 | <2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0-1.5 | 1.5-2.0 | <2.0 |
Endocardial fractional shortening, % | 27-45 | 22-26 | 17-21 | ≤16 | 25-43 | 20-24 | 15-19 | ≤14 |
Midwall fractional shortening, % | 15-23 | 13-14 | 11-12 | ≤10 | 14-22 | 12-13 | 10-11 | ≤10 |
2D Method | ||||||||
Ejection fraction, % | ≥55 | 45–54 | 30–44 | <30 | ≥55 | 45–54 | 30–44 | <30 |
Doppler Method | ||||||||
Myocard performance index | <0.40 | <0.40 | ||||||
dP/dt | >1100 | <500 | >1100 | <500 | ||||
Bold values: Recommended and best validated.[1] |
Left ventricular function by Strain Rate Imaging
Comparison of segmental Values (mean and SD) for LV strain (TQ<3), with a repeated measures design.[2] | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
All Levels | Apical | Mid | Basal | pValue (Levels) | |
All Walls | -18.6±5.1 | -20.2±5.6 | -18.7±3.3 | -17.0±5.2 | <0.0001 |
Anterior | -19.5±4.2 | -19.4±5.4 | -18.8±3.4 | -20.1±4.0 | 0.001 |
Anteroseptal | -18.8±4.2 | -18.8±5.9 | -19.4±3.2 | -18.3±3.5 | 0.001 |
Inferior | -20.0±4.5* | -22.5±4.5 | -20.4±3.5 | -17.1±3.9 | <0.0001 |
Lateral | -18.3±4.7 | -19.2±5.4 | -18.1±3.5 | -17.3±5.0 | 0.06 |
Posterior | -16.3±6.3† | -17.7±6.0 | -16.8±5.0 | -14.5±7.4 | <0.0001 |
Septal | -18.3±5.3 | -22.3±4.8 | -18.7±3.0 | -13.7±4.0 | <0.0001 |
p (walls) | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
*inferior was significantly different from other walls (p<0.001 except anterior p+0.002), in the comparison of walls at all levels.†Posterior was significantly different from all other walls (p<0.0001). In the comparison oflevels in all walls, each level was significantly different (p <0.0001). LV=left ventricular, TQ=tracking quality. |
References
- Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA, Picard MH, Roman MJ, Seward J, Shanewise J, Solomon S, Spencer KT, St John Sutton M, Stewart W, American Society of Echocardiography's Nomenclature and Standards Committee, Task Force on Chamber Quantification, American College of Cardiology Echocardiography Committee, American Heart Association, and European Association of Echocardiography, European Society of Cardiology. Recommendations for chamber quantification. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2006 Mar;7(2):79-108. DOI:10.1016/j.euje.2005.12.014 |
- Marwick TH, Leano RL, Brown J, Sun JP, Hoffmann R, Lysyansky P, Becker M, and Thomas JD. Myocardial strain measurement with 2-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography: definition of normal range. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009 Jan;2(1):80-4. DOI:10.1016/j.jcmg.2007.12.007 |