ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2021
Inter-vendor variability and reproducibility of subcostal left ventricular longitudinal strain.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term imaging analysis of a myocarditis case: Utilizing strain with echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance findings.Journal of cardiology cases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left ventricular longitudinal strain (LVLS) performed using subcostal windows is a novel alternative for patients who require strain imaging but have poor apical windows. We investigated the reproducibility and inter-vendor variability of subcostal LVLS. One hundred and twenty-four echocardiographic studies were analysed from 73 women with early stage HER2-positive breast cancer. Speckle tracking strain was performed offline using EchoPAC and TomTec on subcostal 4-chamber and 3-chamber views to obtain subcostal 4-chamber (SC4_LS) and 3-chamber (SC3_LS) LVLS which was then averaged (SCav_LS). Reproducibility of subcostal single chamber and averaged LVLS were assessed. Measurements between platforms were compared. Strain was reported in absolute magnitude. EchoPAC measurements of SC3_LS (20.5 ± 2.4% vs. 21.2 ± 2.5%, p = 0.002) and SCav_LS (20.9 ± 2.1% vs. 21.2 ± 2.1%, p = 0.02) were lower than TomTec measurements while SC4_LS was similar (21.3 ± 2.7% vs. 21.3 ± 2.5%, p = 0.94). Mean differences between EchoPAC and TomTec were ≤ 0.6% strain units for all subcostal LVLS measurements; SCav_LS showed the narrowest limits of agreement (LOA) (mean difference - 0.3%, LOA - 3.2 to 2.6%). EchoPAC and TomTec measurements of SCav_LS showed good correlation (r = 0.76, p < 0.001). Intra-observer and inter-observer analysis showed good reproducibility. Inter-observer variability was lower than inter-vendor variability; SCav_LS was most reproducible: inter-observer relative mean error was 3.6% for EchoPAC and 4.3% for TomTec and inter-observer LOA were ± 2.1% for EchoPAC and ± 2.6% for TomTec. Averaged subcostal LVLS was highly reproducible with inter-observer variability comparable to GLS. Inter-vendor differences in averaged subcostal LVLS were small but statistically significant.
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.