Aims Altered left ventricular (LV) haemodynamic forces (HDFs) have been associated with positive and negative remodelling after pathogenic or therapeutic events. We aimed to identify LV HDFs patterns associated with adverse LV remodelling (aLVr) in reperfused segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Methods and results Forty‐nine acute STEMI patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) at 1 week (baseline) and after 4 months (follow‐up). LV HDFs were computed at baseline from cine CMR long axis data sets, using a novel technique based on endocardial boundary tracking, both in apex‐base (A‐B) and latero‐septal (L‐S) directions. HDFs distribution was evaluated by L‐S over A‐B HDFs ratio (L‐S/A‐B HDFs ratio %). HDFs parameters were computed over the entire heartbeat, in systole and diastole. At baseline, aLVr patients had lower systolic L‐S HDF (2.7 ± 0.9 vs. 3.6 ± 1%; P = 0.027) and higher diastolic L‐S/A‐B HDF ratio (28 ± 14 vs. 19 ± 6%; P = 0.03). At univariate logistic regression analysis, higher infarct size [odds ratio (OR) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.1; P = 0.04], higher L‐S/A‐B HDFs ratio (OR 1.1; 95% CI 1.01–1.2; P = 0.05) and lower L‐S HDFs (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.2–0.9; P = 0.04) were associated with aLVr at follow‐up. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, diastolic L‐S/A‐B HDF ratio remained the only independent predictor of aLVr (OR 1.1; 95% CI 1.01–1.2; P = 0.04). Conclusions Misalignment of diastolic haemodynamic forces after STEMI is associated with aLVr after 4 months.

BackgroundEffects of Sacubitril/Valsartan (S/V) on left ventricular (LV) mechanics and ventricular-arterial coupling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are not completely understood. The aim of this study was to evaluate both cardiac and vascular remodeling in a group of HFrEF patients undergoing S/V therapy.MethodsFifty HFrEF patients eligible to start a therapy with S/V were enrolled. Echocardiographic evaluation was performed at baseline and after 6 months of follow-up (FU). Beside standard evaluation, including global longitudinal strain (GLS), estimated hemodynamic forces (HDFs) and non-invasive pressure-volume curves (PV loop) were assessed using dedicated softwares. HDFs were evaluated over the entire cardiac cycle, in systole and diastole, both in apex to base (A-B) and latero-septal (L-S) directions. The distribution of LV HDFs was evaluated by L-S over A-B HDFs ratio (L-S/A-B HDFs ratio). Parameters derived from estimated PV loop curves were left ventricular end-systolic elastance (Ees), arterial elastance (Ea), and ventricular-arterial coupling (VAC).ResultsAt 6 months of FU indexed left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes decreased (EDVi: 101 ± 28 mL vs. 86 ± 30 mL, p < 0.001; ESVi: 72 ± 23 mL vs. 55 ± 24 mL, p < 0.001), ejection fraction and GLS significantly improved (EF: 29 ± 6% vs. 37 ± 7%, p < 0.001; GLS: −9 ± 3% vs. −13 ± 4%, p < 0.001). A reduction of Ea (2.11 ± 0.91 mmHg/mL vs. 1.72 ± 0.44 mmHg/mL, p = 0.008) and an improvement of Ees (1.01 ± 0.37 mmHg/mL vs. 1.35 ± 0.6 mmHg/mL, p < 0.001) and VAC (2.3 ± 1.1 vs. 1.5 ± 0.7, p < 0.001) were observed. Re-alignment of HDFs occurred, with a reduction of diastolic L-S/A-B HDFs ratio [23 (20–35)% vs. 20 (11–28) %, p < 0.001].ConclusionS/V therapy leads to a complex phenomenon of reverse remodeling involving increased myocardial contractility, HDFs distribution improvement, and afterload reduction.

Aim of the present study was to describe the left ventricular longitudinal strain (LS) in all myocardial layers in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in different LV geometry and to compare LS analysis before and early after acute LV unloading provided by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). 68 patients were enrolled. LS was measured from the endocardial layer (Endo-LS), epicardial layer (Epi-LS) and full thickness of myocardium (Transmural-LS) before and after TAVI. Patients were divided in two groups accordingly with relative wall thickness (RWT): concentric LV hypertrophy (cLVH) vs eccentric LV hypertrophy (eLVH). Less impaired values of LS at baseline were observed, in all layers, in patients with cLVHas compared to patients with eLVH (Endo-LS was − 13.2 ± 2 vs − 11.1±3 %, p = 0.041; Epi-LS was − 11.8 ± 1.8 vs − 9.9 ± 3 %, p = 0.043; Transmural-LS was − 12.3 ± 1.8 vs − 10.49 ± 3.3 %, p = 0.02, respectively). A significant improvement in endocardial LS (Endo-LS) after TAVI was detected only in cLVH(− 13 ± 2 vs − 14 ± 2, p = 0.011). Our findings documented that concentric LVH had better basal strain function and showed a better myocardial recovery after TAVI compared to eLVH.