-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
HIT Poster session 2, European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging, Volume 17, Issue suppl_2, December 2016, Pages ii74–ii80, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jew246
- Share Icon Share
Extract
Background: Myocardial deformation imaging by speckle tracking (ST) represents one of the latest improvements in echocardiography. Clinical application has been limited by the lack of agreement between different companies. When a laboratory is equipped with new technology, the concordance between vendors should be analyzed.
Methods: We performed echocardiographic studies in 36 patients (men: 55,6%, age: 55,8 ± 15,9 years) with several indications (coronary artery disease: 22,2%, heart failure: 16,7%, normal subjects: 36,1%). All images were acquired in the same machine (EPIQ7, Philips®). Afterward we used two software packages to conduct myocardial deformation analysis, first with raw data (QLAB v.10.3, Philips®) and later with images stored in DICOM format (VVI v.2.0, Siemens®), always by the same operator. After checking appropriate identification and tracking of the endocardium, either manual or automatically, values of GLS (global longitudinal strain), LS4C (longitudinal strain in apical 4C), LVEF (left ventricle ejection fraction) and LVEDV (left ventricle end-diastolic volume) were obtained. To assess concordance we used intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis with bias (mean difference) and 95% limits of agreement (LOA).