These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of Longitudinal and Apical Foetal Speckle Tracking Echocardiography Using Tissue Motion Annular Displacement and Segmental Longitudinal Strain.
    Author: Derpa VF, Koch R, Möllers M, Hammer K, Oelmeier de Murcia K, Köster HA, Falkenberg MK, Braun J, Klockenbusch W, Schmitz R.
    Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol; 2019 Jan; 45(1):233-245. PubMed ID: 30482712.
    Abstract:
    The aim of our prospective pilot study with exploratory analysis was to compare longitudinal and apical foetal speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) using tissue motion annular displacement (TMAD) and segmental longitudinal strain (SLS). We compared two different STE quantification tools in a longitudinal and apical four-chamber view in 57 normal foetuses between 20 and 40 wk of gestation. Myocardial mechanical dyssynchrony and strain were assessed using offline quantification software (QLab Version 10.3, Philips Medical Systems, Andover, MA, USA). We compared the dyssynchrony measurements with TMAD and SLS in longitudinal and apical four-chamber views. Furthermore, we examined the segmental strain values of both ventricles with SLS and compared the differences between longitudinal and apical measurements. Dyssynchrony measurements with TMAD and SLS and strain measurements with SLS were feasible in all cases. In the apical view, the dyssynchrony measurements with TMAD were systematically greater than those achieved with SLS (p < 0.001). For the longitudinal view, no differences were observed between tools (p = 0.153). The application of SLS provided similar results for dyssynchrony in both views (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.281, p = 0.623), but the strain measurements in the left and right ventricles differed significantly between views (ICC = -0.082, p = 0.011, and ICC = -0.061, p = 0.024, respectively). For TMAD, we found large differences in the dyssynchrony values between longitudinal and apical assessment (ICC = -0.060, p = 0.03). Furthermore, TMAD exhibited reduced accuracy in the system's automatic tracking algorithm, limiting the data quality. The dyssynchrony assessment is affected less by the foetal position in SLS than in TMAD. The strain readings in SLS varied depending on the view in which they were assessed. The application of TMAD cannot be recommended for foetal STE.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]