Comparison of septal strain patterns in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Optimization: A Comprehensive Approach

Since the first report on biventricular pacing in 1994, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has become standard for patients with advanced heart failure (HF) and ventricular conduction delay. CRT improves myocardial function by resynchronizing myocardial contraction, which results in reverse left ventricular remodeling and improves symptoms and clinical outcomes. Despite the accelerated development of CRT device technology and its increased application in treating HF patients, almost one-third of these patients do not respond to the therapy or gain any clinical benefit from device implantation. Over the last decade, multiple cardiac imaging modalities have provided a deeper understanding of myocardial pathophysiology, thereby improving HF treatment management. However, the optimal strategy for improving the CRT response remains debatable. This article provides an updated overview of the electropathophysiology of myocardial dysfunction in ventricular conduction delay and the diagnostic approaches involving the use of multiple modalities.

Comparison of strain parameters in dyssynchronous heart failure between speckle tracking echocardiography vendor systems

Background

Although mechanical dyssynchrony parameters derived by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) may predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), comparability of parameters derived with different STE vendors is unknown.

Methods

In the MARC study, echocardiographic images of heart failure patients obtained before CRT implantation were prospectively analysed with vendor specific STE software (GE EchoPac and Philips QLAB) and vendor-independent software (TomTec 2DCPA). Response was defined as change in left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume between examination before and six-months after CRT implantation. Basic longitudinal strain and mechanical dyssynchrony parameters (septal to lateral wall delay (SL-delay), septal systolic rebound stretch (SRSsept), and systolic stretch index (SSI)) were obtained from either separate septal and lateral walls, or total LV apical four chamber. Septal strain patterns were categorized in three types. The coefficient of variation and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were analysed. Dyssynchrony parameters were associated with CRT response using univariate regression analysis and C-statistics.

Results

Two-hundred eleven patients were analysed. GE-cohort (n = 123): age 68 years (interquartile range (IQR): 61–73), 67% male, QRS-duration 177 ms (IQR: 160–192), LV ejection fraction: 26 ± 7%. Philips-cohort (n = 88): age 67 years (IQR: 59–74), 60% male, QRS-duration: 179 ms (IQR: 166–193), LV ejection fraction: 27 ± 8. LV derived peak strain was comparable in the GE- (GE: -7.3 ± 3.1%, TomTec: −6.4 ± 2.8%, ICC: 0.723) and Philips-cohort (Philips: −7.7 ± 2.7%, TomTec: −7.7 ± 3.3%, ICC: 0.749). SL-delay showed low ICC values (GE vs. TomTec: 0.078 and Philips vs. TomTec: 0.025). ICC’s of SRSsept and SSI were higher but only weak (GE vs. TomTec: SRSsept: 0.470, SSI: 0.467) (Philips vs. QLAB: SRSsept: 0.419, SSI: 0.421). Comparability of septal strain patterns was low (Cohen’s kappa, GE vs. TomTec: 0.221 and Philips vs. TomTec: 0.279). Septal strain patterns, SRSsept and SSI were associated with changes in LV end-systolic volume for all vendors. SRSsept and SSI had relative varying C-statistic values (range: 0.530–0.705) and different cut-off values between vendors.

Conclusions

Although global longitudinal strain analysis showed fair comparability, assessment of dyssynchrony parameters was vendor specific and not applicable outside the context of the implemented platform. While the standardization taskforce took an important step for global peak strain, further standardization of STE is still warranted.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12947-017-0116-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparison of strain imaging techniques in CRT candidates: CMR tagging, CMR feature tracking and speckle tracking echocardiography

Parameters using myocardial strain analysis may predict response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). As the agreement between currently available strain imaging modalities is unknown, three different modalities were compared. Twenty-seven CRT-candidates, prospectively included in the MARC study, underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging and echocardiographic examination. Left ventricular (LV) circumferential strain was analysed with CMR tagging (CMR-TAG), CMR feature tracking (CMR-FT), and speckle tracking echocardiography (STE). Basic strain values and parameters of dyssynchrony and discoordination obtained with CMR-FT and STE were compared to CMR-TAG. Agreement of CMR-FT and CMR-TAG was overall fair, while agreement between STE and CMR-TAG was often poor. For both comparisons, agreement on discoordination parameters was highest, followed by dyssynchrony and basic strain parameters. For discoordination parameters, agreement on systolic stretch index was highest, with fair intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) (CMR-FT: 0.58, STE: 0.55). ICC of septal systolic rebound stretch (SRS_sept) was poor (CMR-FT: 0.41, STE: 0.30). Internal stretch factor of septal and lateral wall (ISF_sep-lat) showed fair ICC values (CMR-FT: 0.53, STE: 0.46), while the ICC of the total LV (ISF_LV) was fair for CMR-FT (0.55) and poor for STE (ICC: 0.32). The CURE index had a fair ICC for both comparisons (CMR-FT: 0.49, STE 0.41). Although comparison of STE to CMR-TAG was limited by methodological differences, agreement between CMR-FT and CMR-TAG was overall higher compared to STE and CMR-TAG. CMR-FT is a potential clinical alternative for CMR-TAG and STE, especially in the detection of discoordination in CRT-candidates.

Echocardiography and cardiac resynchronisation therapy, friends or foes?

Echocardiography is used in cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) to assess cardiac function, and in particular left ventricular (LV) volumetric status, and prediction of response. Despite its widespread applicability, LV volumes determined by echocardiography have inherent measurement errors, interobserver and intraobserver variability, and discrepancies with the gold standard magnetic resonance imaging. Echocardiographic predictors of CRT response are based on mechanical dyssynchrony. However, parameters are mainly tested in single-centre studies or lack feasibility. Speckle tracking echocardiography can guide LV lead placement, improving volumetric response and clinical outcome by guiding lead positioning towards the latest contracting segment. Results on optimisation of CRT device settings using echocardiographic indices have so far been rather disappointing, as results suffer from noise. Defining response by echocardiography seems valid, although re-assessment after 6 months is advisable, as patients can show both continuous improvement as well as deterioration after the initial response. Three-dimensional echocardiography is interesting for future implications, as it can determine volume, dyssynchrony and viability in a single recording, although image quality needs to be adequate. Deformation patterns from the septum and the derived parameters are promising, although validation in a multicentre trial is required. We conclude that echocardiography has a pivotal role in CRT, although clinicians should know its shortcomings.