Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29047378›Full record

Trial reportCardiovascular ultrasound2017

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

Wouter M van Everdingen, Alexander H Maass, Kevin Vernooy, Mathias Meine, Cornelis P Allaart, Frederik J De Lange, Arco J Teske, Bastiaan Geelhoed, Michiel Rienstra, Isabelle C Van Gelder and 2 more

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cardiovascular ultrasound, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Impact of myocardial phenotype on optimal atrioventricular delay settings during biventricular and left bundle branch pacing at rest and during exercise: insights from a virtual patient study.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

12 authors.

Wouter M van EverdingenDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, P.O. Box 855500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. w.m.vaneverdingen@umcutrecht.nl.
Alexander H MaassDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Kevin VernooyDepartment of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Mathias MeineDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, P.O. Box 855500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cornelis P AllaartDepartment of Cardiology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Frederik J De LangeDepartment of Cardiology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Arco J TeskeDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, P.O. Box 855500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Bastiaan GeelhoedDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Michiel RienstraDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Isabelle C Van GelderDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marc A VosDepartment of Medical Physiology, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Maarten J CramerDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, P.O. Box 855500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough 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.

methodsIn 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.

resultsTwo-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.

conclusionsAlthough 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.

Indexed as

AgedCardiac Resynchronization TherapyEchocardiographyElastic ModulusEquipment DesignFemaleHeart FailureHeart VentriclesHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveStroke VolumeTreatment OutcomeCardiac resynchronization therapyDyssynchronyHeart failureResponseSpeckle tracking echocardiographyStrainVendor comparison

Identifiers

PMID29047378
PMCPMC5648447

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.