Value of two-dimensional speckle tracking imaging in assessing left ventricular function and synchrony in patients with complete left bundle branch block

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2019.11.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the effect of different strain patterns on left ventricular systolic function and synchrony in complete left bundle branch block (CLBBB) patients using two-dimensional speckle tracking imaging (2D-STI).

Methods

Ninety patients with CLBBB were included from April 2016 to April 2018. The patients with CLBBB were divided into two groups based on the criteria of classic pattern of dyssynchrony (CPD) and non-classic pattern of dyssynchrony (n-CPD). Furthermore, patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)> 50% were further selected and divided into a CPD group and n-CPD group as above. Thirty healthy subjects were included as controls. Common echocardiography and 2D-STI were performed. Left ventricular end-diastolic dimension and volume (LVEDD and LVEDV) as well as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were measured. Global left ventricular longitudinal strain (GLS), interventricular mechanical delay time (IVMD), basal-segment strain septal to lateral strain peak time delay (b-Ssl), mid-segment septal to lateral strain peak time delay (m-Ssl), and standard deviation of time to longitudinal strain peak for the left ventricular 18 segments (SDt) were measured and calculated.

Results

LAD, RVBD, E/e′, LVEDD, and LVEDV values in the CPD and n-CPD groups were significantly higher than those in the control group, and E/A and EDT in the CPD and n-CPD groups were significantly lower than those in the control group (t=5.12, 3.67, 7.29, 5.69, 5.89, 3.15, 2.05, 5.89, 5.22, and 3.83, P<0.01). Compared with the n-CPD group, LAD and E/e′ values were significantly higher and E/A was significantly lower in the CPD group (t=8.12, 3.24, and 3.94, respectively, P<0.001). Compared with the healthy control group, QRS, LVEDD, LVESD, LVEDV, LVESV, IVMD, b-Ssl, m-Ssl, and SDt values were significantly higher and LVEF, Sept-LS, Lat-LS, and GLS values were significantly lower (t=20.38, 7.17, 7.35, 6.50, 5.86, 10.24, 7.15, 6.35, 11.24, 10.99, 5.92, and 6.12, respectively; P<0.001) in the CPD group; QRS, LVEDD, LVESD, LVEDV, LVESV, IVMD, b-Ssl, m-Ssl, and SDt values were significantly higher and LVEF, Sept-LS, Lat-LS, and GLS values were significantly lower (t=16.54, 1.99, 2.12, 2.07, 5.87, 2.53, 2.10, 5.06, 2.68, 3.66, 2.06, and 3.62, respectively, P<0.05) in the n-CPD group. Compared with the n-CPD group, QRS, LVEDD, LVESD, LVEDV, LVESV, IVMD, b-Ssl, m-Ssl, and SDt values were significantly higher and LVEF, Sept-LS, Lat-LS, and GLS values were significantly lower (t=4.68, 5.96, 6.63, 5.32, 5.01, 5.10, 5.28, 4.86, 7.16, 4.74, 7.20, 3.78, and 3.57, respectively, P<0.001) in the CPD group. Further, patients with LVEF > 50% were selected for comparisons, and there was no significant difference in LVEF between the two groups (P>0.05). Compared with the healthy control group, QRS, LVEDD, LVESD, LVEDV, LVESV, IVMD, b-Ssl, m-Ssl, and SDt values were significantly higher and Sept-LS, Lat-LS, and GLS values were significantly lower (t=19.44, 4.01, 5.21, 5.61, 4.73, 9.19, 5.27, 3.16, 3.25, 8.02, 4.15, and 5.42, respectively, P<0.001) in the CPD group; QRS, LVEDD, LVEDV, LVESV, IVMD, b-Ssl, m-Ssl, and SDt values were significantly higher and Sept-LS and GLS values were significantly lower (t=20.68, 2.46, 3.15, 3.10, 6.95, 3.00, 4.59, 6.53, 3.84, and 4.05, respectively, P<0.05) in the n-CPD group. Compared with the n-CPD group, QRS, LVEDD, LVESD, LVEDV, LVESV, IVMD, b-Ssl, and SDt values in CPD group were significantly higher and Sept-LS, Lat- LS, and GLS values were significantly lower (t=2.73, 2.13, 3.88, 3.06, 2.19, 3.94, 3.00, 3.25, 4.38, 2.90, and 2.30, respectively, P<0.05l) in the CPD group.

Conclusion

Conventional echocardiography combined with 2D-STI technology can early detect reduced systolic function and systolic synchronicity of the left ventricle in CLBBB patients, as well as the phenomenon that the systolic function and systolic synchronicity are further decreased in typical CLBBB compared with non-typical CLBBB, which can prompt clinical attention to typical CLBBB patients and timely treatment intervention.

Key words: Echocardiography, Complete left bundle branch block, Systolic function, Systolic synchrony

Bo Pang, Guangyuan Li, Yonghuai Wang, Pingping Meng, Chunyan Ma, Jun Yang. Value of two-dimensional speckle tracking imaging in assessing left ventricular function and synchrony in patients with complete left bundle branch block[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2019, 16(11): 841-847.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://chaosheng.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2019.11.009

https://chaosheng.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V16/I11/841

Figures/Tables 4

References 16

1	Breithardt G, Breithardt OA. Left bundle branch block, an old-new entity [J]. J Cardiovasc Transl Res, 2012, 5(2): 107-116.
2	Forsha D, Slorach C, Chen CK, et al. Classic-pattern dyssynchrony and electrical activation delays in pediatric dilated cardiomyopathy [J]. J Am Soc Echocardiogr, 2014, 27(9): 956-964.
3	Seo Y, Ishizu T, Sakamaki F, et al. Left bundle branch block and echocardiography in the era of CRT [J]. J Echocardiogr, 2015, 13(1): 6-14.
4	Schneider JF, Thomas HE Jr, Sorlie P, et al. Comparative features of newly acquired left and right bundle branch block in the general population: the Framingham study [J]. Am J Cardiol, 1981, 47(4): 931-940.
5	Risum N, Tayal B, Hansen TF, et al. Identification of Typical Left Bundle Branch Block Contraction by Strain Echocardiography Is Additive to Electrocardiography in Prediction of Long-Term Outcome After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy [J]. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2015, 66(6): 631-641.
6	Wang CL, Wu CT, Yeh YH, et al. Left bundle-branch block contraction patterns identified from radial-strain analysis predicts outcomes following cardiac resynchronization therapy [J]. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 33(6): 869-877.
7	Tanaka H, Nesser HJ, Buck T, et al. Dyssynchrony by speckle-tracking echocardiography and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: results of the Speckle Tracking and Resynchronization (STAR) study [J]. Eur Heart J, 2010, 31(4): 1690-1700.
8	中华医学会超声医学分会超声心动图学组. 中国成年人超声心动图检查测量指南 [J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2016, 25(8): 645-665.
9	Yılmaz S, Kılıc H, Ağac MT, et al. Left ventricular twist was decreased in isolated left bundle branch block with preserved ejection fraction [J]. Anatol J Cardiol, 2017, 17(6): 475-480.
10	蔡思宇，吴祥. 左束支传导阻滞与心脏再同步化治疗 [J]. 心电与循环, 2015, 34(4): 291-296.
11	Auricchio A, Fantoni C, Regoli F, et al. Characterization of left ventricular activation in patients with heart failure and left bundle-branch block [J]. Circulation, 2004, 109(9): 1133-1139.
12	Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging [J]. J Am Soc Echocardiogr, 2015, 28(8): 1-39 e14.
13	Yang N, Liang ZG, Wang ZJ, et al. Combined myocardial deformation to predict cardiac resynchronization therapy response in nonischemic cardiomyopathy [J]. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol, 2017, 40(9): 986-994.
14	Bank AJ, Gage RM, Marek JJ, et al. Mechanical dyssynchrony is additive to ECG criteria and independently associated with reverse remodelling and clinical response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with advanced heart failure [J]. Open Heart, 2015, 2(1): e000246.
15	Carlomagno G, Lengo R, Sordelli C, et al. Recoordination of opposing walls drives the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: a longitudinal study using a strain discoordination index [J]. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown), 2015, 16(11): 736-742.
16	Marechaux, S, Guiot A, Castel AL, et al. Relationship between two-dimensional speckle-tracking septal strain and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and left bundle branch block: a prospective pilot study [J]. J Am Soc Echocardiogr, 2014, 27(5): 501-511.

组别	例数	年龄（岁）	体表面积（m²）	心率（次/min）	LAD（mm）	E/A	EDT（ms）	E/e′
健康对照组	30	53.0±7.8	1.69±0.19	71.80±10.40	31.80±2.99	1.39±0.44	203.32±41.62	8.29±2.28
n-CPD组	46	55.5±10.9	1.70±0.18	73.33±10.62	37.03±5.07^a	0.76±0.20^a	180.93±47.19^a	11.57±4.16^a
CPD组	44	56.4±10.9	1.75±0.18	79.00±13.05^bc	43.56±8.32^bc	0.96±0.63^bc	145.76±47.30^b	14.82±5.84^bc
F值	?	1.71	1.71	3.86	34.23	17.42	14.28	17.47
P值	?	0.19	0.19	<0.05	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	年龄（岁）	体表面积（m²）	心率（次/min）	LAD（mm）	E/A	EDT（ms）	E/e′
健康对照组	30	53.0±7.8	1.69±0.19	71.80±10.40	31.80±2.99	1.39±0.44	203.32±41.62	8.29±2.28
n-CPD组	46	55.5±10.9	1.70±0.18	73.33±10.62	37.03±5.07^a	0.76±0.20^a	180.93±47.19^a	11.57±4.16^a
CPD组	44	56.4±10.9	1.75±0.18	79.00±13.05^bc	43.56±8.32^bc	0.96±0.63^bc	145.76±47.30^b	14.82±5.84^bc
F值	?	1.71	1.71	3.86	34.23	17.42	14.28	17.47
P值	?	0.19	0.19	<0.05	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	QRS（ms）	LVEDD（mm）	LVESD（mm）	LVEDV（ml）	LVESV（ml）	LVEF（%）
对照组	30	92.80±7.63	47.96±2.27	29.03±4.10	85.31±20.24	33.05±9.86	61.30±4.71
n-CPD组	46	151.53±10.98^a	51.42±6.73^a	32.09±6.75	106.91±27.42^a	47.14±21.10^a	57.44±8.89^a
CPD组	44	166.94±19.30^bc	62.08±11.74^bc	46.41±14.53^bc	176.29±91.12^bc	104.76±80.77^bc	45.74±15.08^bc
F值	?	221.72	30.18	33.71	24.78	20.76	24.83
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
组别	例数	Sep-LS（%）	Lat-LS（%）	GLS（%）	IVMD（ms）	b-Ssl（ms）	m-Ssl（ms）	SDt（ms）
对照组	30	-20.97±1.68	-20.50±1.86	-20.83±1.67	28.23±7.34	43.20±40.65	45.57±36.95	31.75±10.18
n-CPD组	46	-17.70±3.62^a	-18.75±4.52^a	-17.95±3.00^a	49.66±18.00^a	91.50±74.48^a	95.28±53.19^a	64.16±18.62^a
CPD组	44	-11.32±4.64^bc	-13.20±5.21^bc	-12.56±4.81^bc	66.67±18.34^bc	187.27±114.24^bc	200.39±159.46^bc	108.11±42.23^bc
F值	?	64.62	18.62	18.85	52.44	28.06	22.56	66.16
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	QRS（ms）	LVEDD（mm）	LVESD（mm）	LVEDV（ml）	LVESV（ml）	LVEF（%）
对照组	30	92.80±7.63	47.96±2.27	29.03±4.10	85.31±20.24	33.05±9.86	61.30±4.71
n-CPD组	46	151.53±10.98^a	51.42±6.73^a	32.09±6.75	106.91±27.42^a	47.14±21.10^a	57.44±8.89^a
CPD组	44	166.94±19.30^bc	62.08±11.74^bc	46.41±14.53^bc	176.29±91.12^bc	104.76±80.77^bc	45.74±15.08^bc
F值	?	221.72	30.18	33.71	24.78	20.76	24.83
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
组别	例数	Sep-LS（%）	Lat-LS（%）	GLS（%）	IVMD（ms）	b-Ssl（ms）	m-Ssl（ms）	SDt（ms）
对照组	30	-20.97±1.68	-20.50±1.86	-20.83±1.67	28.23±7.34	43.20±40.65	45.57±36.95	31.75±10.18
n-CPD组	46	-17.70±3.62^a	-18.75±4.52^a	-17.95±3.00^a	49.66±18.00^a	91.50±74.48^a	95.28±53.19^a	64.16±18.62^a
CPD组	44	-11.32±4.64^bc	-13.20±5.21^bc	-12.56±4.81^bc	66.67±18.34^bc	187.27±114.24^bc	200.39±159.46^bc	108.11±42.23^bc
F值	?	64.62	18.62	18.85	52.44	28.06	22.56	66.16
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	QRS（ms）	LVEDD（mm）	LVESD（mm）	LVEDV（ml）	LVESV（ml）	LVEF（%）
对照组	30	92.80±7.63	47.96±2.27	29.03±4.10	85.31±20.24	33.05±9.86	61.30±4.71
n-CPD组	42	150.94±9.94^a	51.42±6.73^a	32.09±6.75	106.91±27.42^a	42.63±13.67^a	59.47±5.81
CPD组	19	159.79±9.86^bc	53.06±4.84^bc	35.88±4.96^bc	123.87±32.68^bc	50.37±16.21^bc	60.52±5.64
F值	?	273.42	8.26	13.78	15.96	11.75	1.35
P值	?	<0.001	<0.005	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	>0.05
组别	例数	Sep-LS（%）	Lat-LS（%）	GLS（%）	IVMD（ms）	b-Ssl（ms）	m-Ssl（ms）	SDt（ms）
对照组	30	-20.97±1.68	-20.50±1.86	-20.83±1.67	28.23±7.34	43.20±40.65	45.57±36.95	31.75±10.18
n-CPD组	46	-18.20±2.80^a	-19.27±4.10	-18.03±2.69^a	50.00±18.10^a	87.19±66.10^a	94.0±51.97^a	62.27±17.19^a
CPD组	44	-14.65±3.66^bc	-16.11±4.79^bc	-16.14±4.48^bc	65.13±8.85^bc	138.11±76.57^bc	86.42±33.81^b	79.82±32.04^bc
F值	?	32.30	8.76	16.42	47.33	14.0	11.19	39.38
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export