Pediatric Normal Values and Z Score Equations for Left and Right Ventricular Strain by Two-Dimensional Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography Derived from a Large Cohort of Healthy Children - 02/03/23
, Alessandra M. Ferraro, MD a, b, Jamie K. Harrington, MD c, Lynn A. Sleeper, ScD a, b, Adi Adar, MD d, Philip T. Levy, MD b, Andrew J. Powell, MD a, b, David M. Harrild, MD, PhD a, bAbstract |
Background |
Strain values vary with age in children and are both vendor and platform specific. Philips QLAB 10.8 and TomTec AutoSTRAIN are two widely used strain analysis platforms, and both incorporate recent European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging/American Society of Echocardiography/Industry Task Force to Standardize Deformation Imaging guidelines. The aims of this study were to establish normal strain values and Z scores for both platforms using a large data set of healthy children and to compare values among these two platforms and a previous version, QLAB 10.5, which predated the task force guidelines.
Methods |
Echocardiograms from 1,032 subjects <21 years old with structurally and functionally normal hearts were included. Images were obtained on the Philips EPIQ platform. Left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) strain was analyzed using QLAB 10.8 and AutoSTRAIN, and measurement reliability was assessed. Z score equations were derived as a function of age for QLAB 10.8 (LV longitudinal and circumferential strain) and AutoSTRAIN (LV and RV longitudinal strain). A subset (n = 309) was analyzed using QLAB 10.5. Strain values were compared among the three platforms.
Results |
For both of the newer platforms, strain varied with age, with magnitude reaching a maximum at 4 to 5 years. For LV longitudinal strain, the largest differences in value were observed in the youngest patients when using QLAB 10.5; the other two platforms were similar. LV circumferential strain measurements (QLAB 10.5 vs QLAB 10.8) were different for all ages, as were measurements of RV longitudinal strain (QLAB 10.8 vs AutoSTRAIN). Reliability was greater for AutoSTRAIN than for QLAB 10.8 and greater for LV than for RV strain.
Conclusions |
Normal RV and LV strain values and Z scores were generated from a large cohort of children for two commonly used platforms in pediatric echocardiography laboratories. Following the incorporation of task force guidelines, the greatest improvement in standardization was seen in infants. Small differences persist between modern platforms; however, these results support the cautious consideration of comparing interplatform measurements.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Highlights |
• | Normal strain values and Z score equations were derived from 1,000 healthy children. |
• | The data include LV and RV strain from two modern analysis packages. |
• | To date, this is the largest cohort used to derive pediatric strain normal values. |
• | Standardization guidelines improved strain value agreement, especially in infants. |
• | The results support the cautious consideration of comparing interplatform values. |
Keywords : Pediatric strain, Speckle-tracking echocardiography, Normal values, Z scores, Left ventricular function, Right ventricular function
Abbreviations : A2C, A3C, A4C, CS, EAI, ICC, LS, LV, RV
Plan
| This work was supported by the Higgins Family Noninvasive Imaging Research Fund at Boston Children’s Hospital. |
|
| Conflicts of interest: None. |
|
| Drs. Romanowicz and Ferraro contributed equally to this work. |
Vol 36 - N° 3
P. 310-323 - mars 2023 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction: Diagnostic and Prognostic Perspectives
- Sherif F. Nagueh
- Reference Standards in Quantitative Pediatric Echocardiography: A Guide to the Nuanced World of Z Scores and Nomograms
- Massimiliano Cantinotti, Marco Scalese, David Danford, Shelby Kutty
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?