Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Sep 2;17(1):18.
doi: 10.1186/s12947-019-0168-9.

Global longitudinal strain is a more reproducible measure of left ventricular function than ejection fraction regardless of echocardiographic training

Affiliations

Global longitudinal strain is a more reproducible measure of left ventricular function than ejection fraction regardless of echocardiographic training

Sigve Karlsen et al. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. .

Abstract

Background: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is an established method for evaluation of left ventricular (LV) systolic function. Global longitudinal strain (GLS) by speckle tracking echocardiography seems to be an important additive method for evaluation of LV function with improved reproducibility compared with LVEF. Our aim was to compare reproducibility of GLS and LVEF between an expert and trainee both as echocardiographic examiner and analyst.

Methods: Forty-seven patients with recent Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) underwent echocardiographic examination by both an expert echocardiographer and a trainee. Both echocardiographers, blinded for clinical data and each other's findings, performed image analysis for evaluation of intra- and inter- observer variability. GLS was measured using speckle tracking echocardiography. LVEF was calculated by Simpson's biplane method.

Results: The trainee measured a GLS of - 19.4% (±3.5%) and expert - 18.7% (±3.2%) with an Intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.89 (0.74-0.95). LVEF by trainee was 50.3% (±8.2%) and by expert 53.6% (±8.6%), ICC coefficient was 0.63 (0.32-0.80). For GLS the systematic difference was 0.21% (- 4.58-2.64) vs. 4.08% (- 20.78-12.62) for LVEF.

Conclusion: GLS is a more reproducible method for evaluation of LV function than LVEF regardless of echocardiographic training.

Keywords: Echocardiographic training; Global longitudinal strain; Left ventricular ejection fraction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Images obtained by expert echocardiographer analyzed by both trainee and expert. Scatterplot for GLS (a) and LVEF (b). Bland-Altman plot for GLS (c) and LVEF (d). Dotted line illustrates 95% confidence interval and colored dotted line illustrate fixed bias
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Images obtained by trainee echocardiographer analyzed by both trainee and expert. Scatterplot for GLS (a) and LVEF (b). Bland-Altman plot for GLS (c) and LVEF (d). Dotted line illustrates 95% confidence interval and colored dotted line illustrate fixed bias
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Analysis of expert analysis of expert images versus trainee analysis of trainee images. Scatterplot for GLS (a) and LVEF (b). Bland-Altman plot for GLS (c) and LVEF (D). Dotted line illustrates 95% confidence interval and colored dotted line illustrate fixed bias
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Trainee analyzing images obtained by both expert and trainee. Scatterplot for GLS (a) and LVEF (b). Bland-Altman plot for GLS (c) and LVEF (d). Dotted line illustrates 95% confidence interval and colored dotted line illustrate fixed bias
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Expert analyzing images obtained by both expert and trainee. Scatterplot for GLS (a) and LVEF (b). Bland-Altman plot for GLS (c) and LVEF (d). Dotted line illustrates 95% confidence interval and colored dotted line illustrate fixed bias
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Correlation of EDD and E/E’ in trainee analysis of trainee and expert images displayed in scatterplot and Bland-Altman plot. Dotted line illustrates 95% confidence interval

References

    1. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JG, Coats AJ, Falk V, Gonzalez-Juanatey JR, Harjola VP, Jankowska EA, et al. 2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the heart failure association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(27):2129–2200. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw128. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA, Picard MH, Roman MJ, Seward J, Shanewise JS, et al. Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2005;18(12):1440–1463. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2005.10.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hoffmann R, Barletta G, von Bardeleben S, Vanoverschelde JL, Kasprzak J, Greis C, Becher H. Analysis of left ventricular volumes and function: a multicenter comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, cine ventriculography, and unenhanced and contrast-enhanced two-dimensional and three-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014;27(3):292–301. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2013.12.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stanton T, Leano R, Marwick TH. Prediction of all-cause mortality from global longitudinal speckle strain: comparison with ejection fraction and wall motion scoring. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2(5):356–364. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.109.862334. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Grenne B, Eek C, Sjoli B, Dahlslett T, Uchto M, Hol PK, Skulstad H, Smiseth OA, Edvardsen T, Brunvand H. Acute coronary occlusion in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: outcome and early identification by strain echocardiography. Heart. 2010;96(19):1550–1556. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2009.188391. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms