Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26847461›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2016

A simple, fast and reproducible echocardiographic approach to grade left ventricular diastolic function.

Bas M van Dalen, Mihai Strachinaru, Julio van der Swaluw, Marcel L Geleijnse

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Automated algorithms in diastology: how to move forward?The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2022
    Article
  2. Can echocardiographic assessment of diastolic function be automated?The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cardiovascular imaging 2016 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Bas M van DalenDepartment of Cardiology, The Thoraxcenter, Erasmus University Medical Center, 's-Gravendijkwal 230, Room Bd412, 3015 CE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. b.m.vandalen@erasmusmc.nl.
Mihai StrachinaruDepartment of Cardiology, The Thoraxcenter, Erasmus University Medical Center, 's-Gravendijkwal 230, Room Bd412, 3015 CE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Julio van der SwaluwDepartment of Cardiology, Sint Franciscus Gasthuis, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcel L GeleijnseDepartment of Cardiology, The Thoraxcenter, Erasmus University Medical Center, 's-Gravendijkwal 230, Room Bd412, 3015 CE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Echocardiography (ASE/EAE) have published an algorithm for the grading of diastolic function. However, the ability to use this algorithm effectively in daily clinical practice has not been investigated. We hypothesized that in some patients it may be difficult to grade diastolic dysfunction with this scheme, since there may be discrepancies in the assessed parameters. The aim of the current study was to test the feasibility of the ASE/EAE algorithm and to compare this with a new Thoraxcenter (TXC) algorithm. The ASE/EAE and TXC algorithms were applied to 200 patients. The ASE/EAE algorithm starts with assessment of diastolic myocardial wall velocities and left atrial (LA) volumes with subsequent assessment of E/A ratio, E-wave deceleration time and pulmonary venous flow. The TXC algorithm reverses these steps, uses LA dimension instead of volume and does not include a Valsalva manoeuvre and pulmonary venous flow. Due to inconsistencies between diastolic myocardial wall velocities and LA volumes and a not covered E/A ratio in the range of 1.5-2 it was not possible to classify 48 % of patients with the ASE/EAE algorithm, as opposed to only 10 % by the TXC algorithm. LA volume was always needed in the ASE/EAE algorithm. In only 64 % of patients LA size was necessary by the TXC algorithm. When LA volume would have been used instead of LA dimension, grading of LV diastolic function would have been different in only 2 % of patients without apparent improvement. Assessment of LA dimension was considerably faster than LA volume. The TXC algorithm to grade LV diastolic dysfunction was compared to the ASE/EAE algorithm simpler, faster, better reproducible and yields a higher diagnostic outcome.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsVentricular Function, LeftAdultAgedAtrial Function, LeftDiastoleEchocardiographyFeasibility StudiesFemaleHeart AtriaHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsObserver VariationDiastolic dysfunctionDiastolic functionEchocardiography

Identifiers

PMID26847461
PMCPMC4853445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.