ArticleAsiaIntervention2025
Temporal profile of right and left ventricular wall deformation analysis using 2D speckle tracking echocardiography following atrial septal defect closure.
Article in AsiaIntervention, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Analysing temporal strain changes in right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) walls post-atrial septal defect (ASD) closure is of clinical importance. Aims: We aimed to evaluate acute/short-term changes in RV/LV wall deformation after ASD closure using two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2D-STE). Methods: A total of 43 patients with ASD and 20 controls had echocardiograms before and after ASD closure. Results: Of the 43 patients with secundum ASD (mean age 27.37 years), 48.8% were closed surgically, while 51.2% underwent device closure. At baseline, LV global longitudinal strain (GLS; 2-chamber view GLS: 16.95% vs 20.73%; p=0.0001, apical long-axis view GLS 16.48% vs 20.90%; p=0.0001, 4-chamber view GLS 16.93% vs 21.56%; p=0.0001, average GLS 16.75% vs 21.31%; p=0.0001) and RV GLS (19.22% vs 24.27%; p=0.0001) were significantly lower in the patients with ASD compared to controls. After closure, the average LV GLS rapidly improved at 24 hours from baseline (16.75% to 17.28%; p=0.004), with sustained increases at 1 and 3 months (18.16% and 19.40%; p=0.001). The mean RV GLS also improved at all serial timepoints (baseline, 24 hrs, 1 month, and 3 months) with values of 19.22%, 19.85%, 20.70%, and 22.23%, respectively (p=0.0001). As compared to surgery, LV GLS and RV GLS were much better in the device group (average LV GLS at 24 hrs, 1 month, and 3 months: 16.54% vs 17.98%, 17.34% vs 18.92%, and 18.80% vs 19.96%, respectively; mean RV GLS at 24 hrs, 1, and 3 months: 17.83% vs 21.78%, 18.73% vs 22.58%, and 20.70% vs 23.70%, respectively). Conclusions: This GLS study demonstrates significant reverse remodelling of both the RV and LV after ASD closure. Device closure was associated with superior strain rate recovery compared to surgery at the 3-month midterm follow-up.
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.