Yet another echocardiographic index: do we need more?

Yet another echocardiographic index: do we need more? This editorial refers to ‘Ratio of transmitral early filling velocity to early diastolic strain rate predicts long-term risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population’, by M.C.H. Lassen et al., doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy164. The search for non-invasive indexes of left ventricular (LV) filling pressures has, for many years, been a hot topic in echocardiographic research. During the last few decades, several echocardiographic indexes have been introduced combining the ratio of E (transmitral early diastolic flow velocity) to e’ [early diastolic mitral annulus velocity by pulsed wave tissue Doppler imaging (TDI)]1 or, more recently, to e’SR [peak early diastolic LV longitudinal strain rate by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE)].2 These indexes were associated with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) and were introduced as non-invasive markers of LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP). The ratio E/e’ has been extensively studied and has been established as both a simplified marker of elevated filling pressures and a prognostic marker in cardiovascular subgroups, as well as in the general population.3–5 Even if a mechanistic rationale for this association has been introduced,1 the correlations that have been reported have been quite modest and with quite a large amount of scatter, especially in patients without LV systolic dysfunction.6 This indicates that factors other than those incorporated in the index E/e’ may be of importance, as demonstrated in the recommended algorithm from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography (Figure 1). Figure 1 View largeDownload slide A modified algorithm for the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures in patients with depressed LVEF and patients with myocardial disease and normal LVEF. Modified from the 2016 European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography.5 (modified with permission from reference 5). LA, left atrium; LAP, left atrial pressure; TR, tricuspid regurgitation. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide A modified algorithm for the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures in patients with depressed LVEF and patients with myocardial disease and normal LVEF. Modified from the 2016 European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography.5 (modified with permission from reference 5). LA, left atrium; LAP, left atrial pressure; TR, tricuspid regurgitation. The ratio E/e’SR has also been introduced as a promising marker of filling pressures.2 However, the closest correlation to PCWP was observed when using peak strain rate (SR) during isovolumic relaxation (IVR), and only a modest correlation to PCWP when using peak e’SR during early filling,2 which is the parameter most frequently used in clinical studies.7 e’ by pulsed wave TDI have inborn methodological limitations affecting the ratio E/e’, such as angle dependency, as well as the fact that measurements are being sampled from only one or two locations in the LV base, usually in a four-chamber view. One of the strengths of pulsed wave TDI for assessing e’ is the relative independency of top quality images, and e’ may therefore be used in a wide spectrum of patients. This is in contrast to STE-derived measures, like e’SR, being more dependent on good image quality, which again might limit the clinical utility in patients with insufficient image quality. The angle independency achieved by using STE and the incorporation of the diastolic longitudinal deformation rate of the entire LV wall are possible benefits of using E/e’SR rather than E/e’ for assessing LV filling pressures. As a large LV may have greater velocities, the normalization to LV length, as included in the SR approach, may be of importance. In clinical practice, some LV segments are often excluded in the calculation of e’SR due to suboptimal image quality. Whether this exclusion may reduce the accuracy of e’SR and E/e’SR is unknown, but it might potentially affect the results. Even if using e’SR rather than e’ may potentially reduce the scatter and improve the correlations when comparing the index to LVEDP or PCWP, E/e’SR is still an imperfect marker of LV filling pressure. Early diastolic LV deformation is, in general, governed by active LV relaxation, restoring forces as well as early diastolic LV load.8,9 Moreover, diastolic function is an interplay between three-dimensional LV deformation, atrial function, and pulmonary vein flow. Therefore, reducing the assessment of LV diastolic function to an approach only including transmitral flow velocity and longitudinal diastolic myocardial velocity or strain rate will always be a simplification. Transmitral early diastolic flow velocity reflects the blood velocity through an echocardiographic sample area, which is fixed with respect to the thoracic wall. As the mitral annulus moves towards the atrium during early diastole, the LV engulfs a certain volume of blood that shifts compartment from the left atrium (LA) to LV with only limited flow velocity. Thus, E primarily reflects the rapid movement of blood travelling through the echocardiographic sample volume, whereas the volume of blood being engulfed by the LV base is reflected by the LV long axis measures. Therefore, an alternative mechanical understanding of the ratios E/e’ and E/e’SR is that they reflect the relationship between the early diastolic pressure-driven fraction of LV filling and the mitral annular displacement-driven filling fraction of the LV. As early diastolic deformation rates and velocities decrease with reduced LV diastolic function and increasing filling pressures, the magnitude of both indexes will increase with relatively small changes in E. In this issue of the European HeartJournal, Lassen et al. describe the prognostic properties of E/e’SR in the general population, and compare it to established echocardiographic measures as well as clinical prognostic markers.10 In a population without known cardiovascular disease with a follow-up of 11 years, E/e’SR provided independent and incremental prognostic information when compared to E/e’, where e’ was assessed by color TDI, and remained a strong independent predictor of myocardial infarction, heart failure admission, or cardiovascular death after adjusting for demographical, clinical, and echocardiographic measures. Interestingly, E/e’SR carried better information of prognosis in participants with preserved systolic function [global longitudinal strain (GLS) above 18%], as opposed to those with reduced systolic function. However, in the calculation of e’, they used color TDI rather than the widely evaluated pulsed wave TDI. One should be aware that a parameter achieved from a two-dimensional-based echocardiographic method like STE and color TDI, will be less accurate in terms of the highest amplitude regarding e’SR. This fact did not preclude the results from Lassen et al., but should obviously be taken into account before guiding patients about their prognosis. As E/e’ has been shown to carry less prognostic information in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), the current study is promising by virtue of its exploration of prognostic information gained by using E/e’SR. Until the variation between different STE software has been overcome, one should be careful using E/e’SR in the prognostic evaluation of patients. E/e’ has been confirmed in numerous studies to be associated with filling pressures in various clinical conditions, as well as being an important prognostic marker of CV disease.3–5 E/e’SR showed promising prognostic properties for CV disease in the study by Lassen et al. Importantly, future studies are needed to determine the usefulness of this echocardiographic index in the clinical and prognostic evaluation of patients. Even if the mechanistic understanding of E/e’SR is not complete, the prognostic information, especially in individuals without LV systolic dysfunction, is promising. GLS has repeatedly shown superior predictive power in patients with suspicion of LV dysfunction11,12 after acute coronary syndromes13,14 and in patients with heart failure stage B.15 The predictive power and clinical use of both systolic and diastolic parameters and ratios should therefore be further explored in future prospective multicenter trials, including E/e’SR, E/e’, and GLS. References 1 Nagueh SF, Middleton KJ, Kopelen HA, Zoghbi WA, Quinones MA. Doppler tissue imaging: A noninvasive technique for evaluation of left ventricular relaxation and estimation of filling pressures. J Am Coll Cardiol  1997; 30: 1527– 1533. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  2 Wang J, Khoury DS, Thohan V, Torre-Amione G, Nagueh SF. Global diastolic strain rate for the assessment of left ventricular relaxation and filling pressures. Circulation  2007; 115: 1376– 1383. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  3 Lancellotti P, Galderisi M, Edvardsen T, Donal E, Goliasch G, Cardim N, Magne J, Laginha S, Hagendorff A, Haland TF, Aaberge L, Martinez C, Rapacciuolo A, Santoro C, Ilardi F, Postolache A, Dulgheru R, Mateescu AD, Beladan CC, Deleanu D, Marchetta S, Auffret V, Schwammenthal E, Habib G, Popescu BA. Echo-Doppler estimation of left ventricular filling pressure: Results of the multicentre EACVI Euro-Filling study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging  2017; 18: 961– 968. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  4 Andersen OS, Smiseth OA, Dokainish H, Abudiab MM, Schutt RC, Kumar A, Sato K, Harb S, Gude E, Remme EW, Andreassen AK, Ha JW, Xu J, Klein AL, Nagueh SF. Estimating left ventricular filling pressure by echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol  2017; 69: 1937– 1948. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  5 Nagueh SF, Smiseth OA, Appleton CP, Byrd BFIII, Dokainish H, Edvardsen T, Flachskampf FA, Gillebert TC, Klein AL, Lancellotti P, Marino P, Oh JK, Alexandru Popescu B, Waggoner AD, Houston T, Oslo N, Phoenix A, Nashville T, Hamilton OC, Uppsala S, Ghent, Liege B, Cleveland O, Novara I, Rochester M, Bucharest R, St. Louis M. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography: An update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging  2016; 17: 1321– 1360. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  6 Ommen SR, Nishimura RA, Appleton CP, Miller FA, Oh JK, Redfield MM, Tajik AJ. Clinical utility of Doppler echocardiography and tissue Doppler imaging in the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures: A comparative simultaneous Doppler-catheterization study. Circulation  2000; 102: 1788– 1794. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  7 Dokainish H, Sengupta R, Pillai M, Bobek J, Lakkis N. Usefulness of new diastolic strain and strain rate indexes for the estimation of left ventricular filling pressure. Am J Cardiol  2008; 101: 1504– 1509. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  8 Opdahl A, Remme EW, Helle-Valle T, Edvardsen T, Smiseth OA. Myocardial relaxation, restoring forces, and early-diastolic load are independent determinants of left ventricular untwisting rate. Circulation  2012; 126: 1441– 1451. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  9 Opdahl A, Remme EW, Helle-Valle T, Lyseggen E, Vartdal T, Pettersen E, Edvardsen T, Smiseth OA. Determinants of left ventricular early-diastolic lengthening velocity: independent contributions from left ventricular relaxation, restoring forces, and lengthening load. Circulation  2009; 119: 2578– 2586. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  10 Lassen MCH, Biering-Sørensen SR, Olsen FJ, Skaarup KG, Tolstrup K, Qasim AN, Møgelvang R, Jensen JS, Biering-Sørensen T. Ratio of transmitral early filling velocity to early diastolic strain rate predicts long term risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population. Eur Heart J  2018 doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy164. 11 Stanton T, Leano R, Marwick TH. Prediction of all-cause mortality from global longitudinal speckle strain: Comparison with ejection fraction and wall motion scoring. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging  2009; 2: 356– 364. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  12 Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, Falk V, González-Juanatey JR, Harjola VP, Jankowska EA, Jessup M, Linde C, Nihoyannopoulos P, Parissis JT, Pieske B, Riley JP, Rosano GMC, Ruilope LM, Ruschitzka F, Rutten FH, van der Meer P; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J  2016; 37: 2129– 2200. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  13 Ersboll M, Valeur N, Mogensen UM, Andersen MJ, Moller JE, Velazquez EJ, Hassager C, Sogaard P, Kober L. Prediction of all-cause mortality and heart failure admissions from global left ventricular longitudinal strain in patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol  2013; 61: 2365– 2373. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  14 Haugaa KH, Grenne BL, Eek CH, Ersboll M, Valeur N, Svendsen JH, Florian A, Sjoli B, Brunvand H, Kober L, Voigt JU, Desmet W, Smiseth OA, Edvardsen T. Strain echocardiography improves risk prediction of ventricular arrhythmias after myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging  2013; 6: 841– 850. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  15 Wang Y, Yang H, Nolan M, Pathan F, Negishi K, Marwick TH. Variations in subclinical left ventricular dysfunction, functional capacity, and clinical outcomes in different heart failure aetiologies. ESC Heart Fail  2018; 10.1002/ehf2.12257. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/about_us/legal/notices) http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png European Heart Journal Oxford University Press

Yet another echocardiographic index: do we need more?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ou_press/yet-another-echocardiographic-index-do-we-need-more-QM06SanzJk
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
ISSN
0195-668X
eISSN
1522-9645
D.O.I.
10.1093/eurheartj/ehy270
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This editorial refers to ‘Ratio of transmitral early filling velocity to early diastolic strain rate predicts long-term risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population’, by M.C.H. Lassen et al., doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy164. The search for non-invasive indexes of left ventricular (LV) filling pressures has, for many years, been a hot topic in echocardiographic research. During the last few decades, several echocardiographic indexes have been introduced combining the ratio of E (transmitral early diastolic flow velocity) to e’ [early diastolic mitral annulus velocity by pulsed wave tissue Doppler imaging (TDI)]1 or, more recently, to e’SR [peak early diastolic LV longitudinal strain rate by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE)].2 These indexes were associated with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) and were introduced as non-invasive markers of LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP). The ratio E/e’ has been extensively studied and has been established as both a simplified marker of elevated filling pressures and a prognostic marker in cardiovascular subgroups, as well as in the general population.3–5 Even if a mechanistic rationale for this association has been introduced,1 the correlations that have been reported have been quite modest and with quite a large amount of scatter, especially in patients without LV systolic dysfunction.6 This indicates that factors other than those incorporated in the index E/e’ may be of importance, as demonstrated in the recommended algorithm from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography (Figure 1). Figure 1 View largeDownload slide A modified algorithm for the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures in patients with depressed LVEF and patients with myocardial disease and normal LVEF. Modified from the 2016 European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography.5 (modified with permission from reference 5). LA, left atrium; LAP, left atrial pressure; TR, tricuspid regurgitation. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide A modified algorithm for the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures in patients with depressed LVEF and patients with myocardial disease and normal LVEF. Modified from the 2016 European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography.5 (modified with permission from reference 5). LA, left atrium; LAP, left atrial pressure; TR, tricuspid regurgitation. The ratio E/e’SR has also been introduced as a promising marker of filling pressures.2 However, the closest correlation to PCWP was observed when using peak strain rate (SR) during isovolumic relaxation (IVR), and only a modest correlation to PCWP when using peak e’SR during early filling,2 which is the parameter most frequently used in clinical studies.7 e’ by pulsed wave TDI have inborn methodological limitations affecting the ratio E/e’, such as angle dependency, as well as the fact that measurements are being sampled from only one or two locations in the LV base, usually in a four-chamber view. One of the strengths of pulsed wave TDI for assessing e’ is the relative independency of top quality images, and e’ may therefore be used in a wide spectrum of patients. This is in contrast to STE-derived measures, like e’SR, being more dependent on good image quality, which again might limit the clinical utility in patients with insufficient image quality. The angle independency achieved by using STE and the incorporation of the diastolic longitudinal deformation rate of the entire LV wall are possible benefits of using E/e’SR rather than E/e’ for assessing LV filling pressures. As a large LV may have greater velocities, the normalization to LV length, as included in the SR approach, may be of importance. In clinical practice, some LV segments are often excluded in the calculation of e’SR due to suboptimal image quality. Whether this exclusion may reduce the accuracy of e’SR and E/e’SR is unknown, but it might potentially affect the results. Even if using e’SR rather than e’ may potentially reduce the scatter and improve the correlations when comparing the index to LVEDP or PCWP, E/e’SR is still an imperfect marker of LV filling pressure. Early diastolic LV deformation is, in general, governed by active LV relaxation, restoring forces as well as early diastolic LV load.8,9 Moreover, diastolic function is an interplay between three-dimensional LV deformation, atrial function, and pulmonary vein flow. Therefore, reducing the assessment of LV diastolic function to an approach only including transmitral flow velocity and longitudinal diastolic myocardial velocity or strain rate will always be a simplification. Transmitral early diastolic flow velocity reflects the blood velocity through an echocardiographic sample area, which is fixed with respect to the thoracic wall. As the mitral annulus moves towards the atrium during early diastole, the LV engulfs a certain volume of blood that shifts compartment from the left atrium (LA) to LV with only limited flow velocity. Thus, E primarily reflects the rapid movement of blood travelling through the echocardiographic sample volume, whereas the volume of blood being engulfed by the LV base is reflected by the LV long axis measures. Therefore, an alternative mechanical understanding of the ratios E/e’ and E/e’SR is that they reflect the relationship between the early diastolic pressure-driven fraction of LV filling and the mitral annular displacement-driven filling fraction of the LV. As early diastolic deformation rates and velocities decrease with reduced LV diastolic function and increasing filling pressures, the magnitude of both indexes will increase with relatively small changes in E. In this issue of the European HeartJournal, Lassen et al. describe the prognostic properties of E/e’SR in the general population, and compare it to established echocardiographic measures as well as clinical prognostic markers.10 In a population without known cardiovascular disease with a follow-up of 11 years, E/e’SR provided independent and incremental prognostic information when compared to E/e’, where e’ was assessed by color TDI, and remained a strong independent predictor of myocardial infarction, heart failure admission, or cardiovascular death after adjusting for demographical, clinical, and echocardiographic measures. Interestingly, E/e’SR carried better information of prognosis in participants with preserved systolic function [global longitudinal strain (GLS) above 18%], as opposed to those with reduced systolic function. However, in the calculation of e’, they used color TDI rather than the widely evaluated pulsed wave TDI. One should be aware that a parameter achieved from a two-dimensional-based echocardiographic method like STE and color TDI, will be less accurate in terms of the highest amplitude regarding e’SR. This fact did not preclude the results from Lassen et al., but should obviously be taken into account before guiding patients about their prognosis. As E/e’ has been shown to carry less prognostic information in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), the current study is promising by virtue of its exploration of prognostic information gained by using E/e’SR. Until the variation between different STE software has been overcome, one should be careful using E/e’SR in the prognostic evaluation of patients. E/e’ has been confirmed in numerous studies to be associated with filling pressures in various clinical conditions, as well as being an important prognostic marker of CV disease.3–5 E/e’SR showed promising prognostic properties for CV disease in the study by Lassen et al. Importantly, future studies are needed to determine the usefulness of this echocardiographic index in the clinical and prognostic evaluation of patients. Even if the mechanistic understanding of E/e’SR is not complete, the prognostic information, especially in individuals without LV systolic dysfunction, is promising. GLS has repeatedly shown superior predictive power in patients with suspicion of LV dysfunction11,12 after acute coronary syndromes13,14 and in patients with heart failure stage B.15 The predictive power and clinical use of both systolic and diastolic parameters and ratios should therefore be further explored in future prospective multicenter trials, including E/e’SR, E/e’, and GLS. References 1 Nagueh SF, Middleton KJ, Kopelen HA, Zoghbi WA, Quinones MA. Doppler tissue imaging: A noninvasive technique for evaluation of left ventricular relaxation and estimation of filling pressures. J Am Coll Cardiol  1997; 30: 1527– 1533. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  2 Wang J, Khoury DS, Thohan V, Torre-Amione G, Nagueh SF. Global diastolic strain rate for the assessment of left ventricular relaxation and filling pressures. Circulation  2007; 115: 1376– 1383. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  3 Lancellotti P, Galderisi M, Edvardsen T, Donal E, Goliasch G, Cardim N, Magne J, Laginha S, Hagendorff A, Haland TF, Aaberge L, Martinez C, Rapacciuolo A, Santoro C, Ilardi F, Postolache A, Dulgheru R, Mateescu AD, Beladan CC, Deleanu D, Marchetta S, Auffret V, Schwammenthal E, Habib G, Popescu BA. Echo-Doppler estimation of left ventricular filling pressure: Results of the multicentre EACVI Euro-Filling study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging  2017; 18: 961– 968. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  4 Andersen OS, Smiseth OA, Dokainish H, Abudiab MM, Schutt RC, Kumar A, Sato K, Harb S, Gude E, Remme EW, Andreassen AK, Ha JW, Xu J, Klein AL, Nagueh SF. Estimating left ventricular filling pressure by echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol  2017; 69: 1937– 1948. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  5 Nagueh SF, Smiseth OA, Appleton CP, Byrd BFIII, Dokainish H, Edvardsen T, Flachskampf FA, Gillebert TC, Klein AL, Lancellotti P, Marino P, Oh JK, Alexandru Popescu B, Waggoner AD, Houston T, Oslo N, Phoenix A, Nashville T, Hamilton OC, Uppsala S, Ghent, Liege B, Cleveland O, Novara I, Rochester M, Bucharest R, St. Louis M. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography: An update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging  2016; 17: 1321– 1360. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  6 Ommen SR, Nishimura RA, Appleton CP, Miller FA, Oh JK, Redfield MM, Tajik AJ. Clinical utility of Doppler echocardiography and tissue Doppler imaging in the estimation of left ventricular filling pressures: A comparative simultaneous Doppler-catheterization study. Circulation  2000; 102: 1788– 1794. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  7 Dokainish H, Sengupta R, Pillai M, Bobek J, Lakkis N. Usefulness of new diastolic strain and strain rate indexes for the estimation of left ventricular filling pressure. Am J Cardiol  2008; 101: 1504– 1509. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  8 Opdahl A, Remme EW, Helle-Valle T, Edvardsen T, Smiseth OA. Myocardial relaxation, restoring forces, and early-diastolic load are independent determinants of left ventricular untwisting rate. Circulation  2012; 126: 1441– 1451. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  9 Opdahl A, Remme EW, Helle-Valle T, Lyseggen E, Vartdal T, Pettersen E, Edvardsen T, Smiseth OA. Determinants of left ventricular early-diastolic lengthening velocity: independent contributions from left ventricular relaxation, restoring forces, and lengthening load. Circulation  2009; 119: 2578– 2586. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  10 Lassen MCH, Biering-Sørensen SR, Olsen FJ, Skaarup KG, Tolstrup K, Qasim AN, Møgelvang R, Jensen JS, Biering-Sørensen T. Ratio of transmitral early filling velocity to early diastolic strain rate predicts long term risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population. Eur Heart J  2018 doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy164. 11 Stanton T, Leano R, Marwick TH. Prediction of all-cause mortality from global longitudinal speckle strain: Comparison with ejection fraction and wall motion scoring. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging  2009; 2: 356– 364. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  12 Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, Falk V, González-Juanatey JR, Harjola VP, Jankowska EA, Jessup M, Linde C, Nihoyannopoulos P, Parissis JT, Pieske B, Riley JP, Rosano GMC, Ruilope LM, Ruschitzka F, Rutten FH, van der Meer P; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J  2016; 37: 2129– 2200. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  13 Ersboll M, Valeur N, Mogensen UM, Andersen MJ, Moller JE, Velazquez EJ, Hassager C, Sogaard P, Kober L. Prediction of all-cause mortality and heart failure admissions from global left ventricular longitudinal strain in patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol  2013; 61: 2365– 2373. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  14 Haugaa KH, Grenne BL, Eek CH, Ersboll M, Valeur N, Svendsen JH, Florian A, Sjoli B, Brunvand H, Kober L, Voigt JU, Desmet W, Smiseth OA, Edvardsen T. Strain echocardiography improves risk prediction of ventricular arrhythmias after myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging  2013; 6: 841– 850. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  15 Wang Y, Yang H, Nolan M, Pathan F, Negishi K, Marwick TH. Variations in subclinical left ventricular dysfunction, functional capacity, and clinical outcomes in different heart failure aetiologies. ESC Heart Fail  2018; 10.1002/ehf2.12257. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/about_us/legal/notices)

Journal

European Heart JournalOxford University Press

Published: May 15, 2018

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off