ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2019
The value of a simplified approach to end-systolic volume measurement for assessment of left ventricular contractile reserve during stress-echocardiography.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hypercontractile phenotype at rest in chronic coronary syndromes predicts impaired functional reserve and increased mortality.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Stress phase bandwidth as a predictor of left ventricular reverse remodeling in patients with new-onset acute decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Contractile Reserve in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Article
- Sustainability and Versatility of the ABCDE Protocol for Stress Echocardiography.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The peak stress/rest ratio of left ventricular (LV) elastance, or LV force, is a load-independent index of left ventricular contractile reserve (LVCR) with stress echo (SE). To assess the accuracy of LVCR calculated during SE with approaches of different complexity. Two-hundred-forty patients were referred to SE for known or suspected coronary artery disease or heart failure and, of those, 200 patients, age 61 ± 15, 99 females, with interpretable volumetric SE were enrolled. All readers had passed the upstream quality control reading for regional wall motion abnormality (RWMA) and end-systolic volume (ESV) measurement. The employed stress was dipyridamole (0.84 mg, 6 min) in 86 (43%) and dobutamine (up to 40 mcg/kg/min) in 114 (57%) patients. All underwent SE with evaluation of RWMA and simultaneous LVCR assessment with stress/rest ratio of LV force (systolic blood pressure by cuff sphygmomanometer/ESV). ESV was calculated in each patient by two of three methods: biplane Simpson rule (S, in 100 patients), single plane area-length (AL, apical four-chamber area and length, in 100 patients), and Teichholz rule (T, from parasternal long axis and/or short axis view, in 200 patients). RMWA were observed in 54 patients. Success rate for ESV measurement was 76% (100/131) for S, 92% (100/109) for AL, and 100% (240/240) for T. There were 100 paired measurements (rest and stress) with S versus T, and 100 with AL versus T. The analysis time was the shortest for T (33 ± 8 s at rest, 34 ± 7 s at stress), intermediate for AL (70 ± 22 s at rest 67 ± 21 s at stress), and the longest for S (136 ± 24 at rest 129 ± 27 s at stress, p < 0.05 vs. T and AL). ESV absolute values were moderately correlated: T versus S (r rest = 0.746, p < 0.01, n = 100; r stress = 0.794, p < 0.01, n = 100); T vs. AL (r = 0.603 p < 0.01, n = 100, at rest and r = 0.820 p < 0.01 n = 100 at peak stress). LVCR values were tightly correlated independently of the method employed: T versus S (r = 0.899, p < 0.01, n = 100), and T versus AL (r = 0.845, p < 0.01, n = 100). LVCR can be accurately determined with all three methods used to extract the raw values of ESV necessary to generate the calculation of Force. Although S is known to be more precise in determining absolute ESV values, the relative (rest-stress) changes can be assessed, with comparable accuracy, with simpler and more feasible T and AL methods, characterized by higher success rate, shorter imaging and analysis time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.