Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), defined by an increase in left ventricular mass (LVM), is a common cardiac finding generally caused by an increase in pressure or volume load. Assessing severity of LVH is of great clinical value in terms of prognosis and treatment choices, as LVH severity grades correlate with the risk for presenting cardiovascular events. The three main cardiac parameters for the assessment of LVH are wall thickness, LVM, and LV geometry. Echocardiography, with large availability and low cost, is the technique of choice for their assessment. Consequently, reference values for LVH severity in clinical guidelines are based on this technique. However, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and computed tomography (CT) are increasingly used in clinical practice, providing excellent image quality. Nevertheless, there is no extensive data to support reference values based on these techniques, while comparative studies between the three techniques show different results in wall thickness and LVM measurements. In this paper, we provide an overview of the different methodologies used to assess LVH severity with echocardiography, CMR and CT. We argue that establishing reference values per imaging modality, and possibly indexed to body surface area and classified per gender, ethnicity and age-group, might be essential for the correct classification of LVH severity.

PMI definitions are not interchangeable. The number of triggers identified and consequently the potential number of events varies significantly, highlighting the importance of rigorous methodology when PMI is a component of a powered endpoint. Emphasis on collection of biomarkers, ECG data, and clinical status at baseline may improve the correct identification of PMI triggers.

No abstract