Relationship between systolic myocardial velocity obtained by tissue Doppler imaging and left ventricular ejection fraction: Systolic myocardial velocity predicts the degree of left ventricular dysfunction in heart failure
Relationship between systolic myocardial velocity obtained by tissue Doppler imaging and left ventricular ejection fraction: Systolic myocardial velocity predicts the degree of left ventricular dysfunction in heart failure
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1540-8175.2008.00694.x
复制
发表时间：
2008-09-01
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
Sizer, Murat
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Duzenli, Mehmet Akif;Ozdemir, Kurtulus;Sizer, Murat
本研究旨在探讨组织多普勒成像（TDI）测定的正常人和心力衰竭（HF）患者心肌收缩期运动速度（Sm）与Simpson法测定的左室射血分数（LVEF）之间的关系。208名LVEF < 50%的HF患者（平均年龄59 ± 11岁）和187名健康受试者（平均年龄57 ± 11岁）入选本研究。测量LVEF，并在二尖瓣环的间隔、外侧、下方和前部获得TDI记录，并测量Sm。计算左室平均Sm。心衰组LVEF与Sm呈显著正相关（r = 0.71，P < 0.0001），而健康对照组无相关性（r = 0.16，P> 0.05）。以Sm < 8 cm/s为界值，判断LVEF在30%~ 49%的敏感性为86%，特异性为93%，阴性预测值为92%;以Sm < 6.0 cm/s为界值，判断LVEF < 30%的敏感性为92%，特异性为84%，阴性预测值为97%计算LVEF所需的时间明显长于计算左室平均Sm所需的时间（327 +/- 98秒vs. 110 +/- 29秒，P < 0.0001），并且LVEF具有更高的观察者间和观察者内变异性。TDI法测得的左室平均Sm具有重复性好、简便、可靠、实用等优点，可用于评价心力衰竭患者左室收缩功能。
This study was planned to research the relationship between systolic myocardial velocity (Sm) obtained by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured according to conventional Simpson's method in healthy subjects and patients with heart failure (HF). Two hundred eight patients with HF whose LVEF < 50% (mean age 59 +/- 11 years) and 187 healthy subjects (mean age 57 +/- 11 years) were enrolled in this study. LVEF was measured and TDI recordings were obtained at the septal, lateral, inferior, and anterior of the mitral annulus, and Sm was measured. LV mean Sm was calculated. In patients with HF, a significant correlation was detected between LVEF and Sm (r = 0.71, P < 0.0001), while no relationship was found between these parameters in healthy subjects (r = 0.16, not significant). The cutoff value of Sm < 8 cm/s for identifying patients with LVEF between 30% and 49% had a sensitivity of 86%, a specificity of 93%, and a negative predictive value of 92%, and the cutoff value of Sm < 6.0 cm/s for identifying patients with LVEF < 30% had a sensitivity of 92%, a specificity of 84%, and a negative predictive value of 97%. The time required to calculate the LVEF was significantly longer than that of LV mean Sm (327 +/- 98 sec vs. 110 +/- 29 sec, P < 0.0001), and LVEF had higher inter- and intraobserver variability. LV mean Sm obtained by TDI, a parameter that is reproducible, easily obtained, reliable, and practical, can be used to evaluate LV systolic function in patients with HF.