2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2015.04.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of Left Ventricular Function by Layer-Specific Strain and Its Relationship to Structural Remodelling in Patients With Hypertension

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

6
31
1
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
6
31
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Previous studies have reported that endomyocardial strain is more susceptible to negative factors, such as ischemia, stress, toxicity, and metabolism. 15,19,[32][33][34] This finding is consistent with the finding in our study that LSendo and CSendo were decreased. This condition may be caused by coronary atherosclerosis and increased intima-media thickness, which may both result in myocardial ischemia.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Previous studies have reported that endomyocardial strain is more susceptible to negative factors, such as ischemia, stress, toxicity, and metabolism. 15,19,[32][33][34] This finding is consistent with the finding in our study that LSendo and CSendo were decreased. This condition may be caused by coronary atherosclerosis and increased intima-media thickness, which may both result in myocardial ischemia.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Mid‐myocardial GLS was shown to be an equally good predictor of CAD in patients with reversible ischemia as layer‐specific GLS in terms of AUC's (Figure ) and was significantly impaired in patients with a true‐positive SPECT (Table ). In the present study, layer‐specific GLS showed a decreasing gradient from the endocardium to the epicardium in both controls and patients with a positive SPECT, in agreement with previous studies . Endocardial GLS failed to stay independently associated with the presence of CAD after multivariable adjustment in contrast to epicardial and mid‐myocardial GLS (Table ), although the difference between GLS parameters lacked significance in terms of AUC's (Figure ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…[33][34][35][36] Endocardial GLS failed to stay independently associated with the presence of CAD after multivariable adjustment in contrast to epicardial and mid-myocardial GLS ( Table 2), although the difference between GLS parameters lacked significance in terms of AUC's ( Figure 3). The notable finding is in contrast to previous studies [34][35][36] and requires further investigation; however, our population of patients with suspected SAP (not suspected acute coronary syndrome or hypertension) differs significantly from the previous studies, [34][35][36] which might explain the different results, or it could simply be due to the better reproducibility ( Figure 6) and superior tracking of the epicardial layer as compared to the endocardial layer. A still-unpublished independent study of layer-specific GLS including 285 patients prospectively enrolled with suspected SAP, preserved LVEF, and no previous cardiac history performed by our group showed that epicardial and mid-myocardial GLS appeared superior to endocardial GLS for diagnosing CAD, indicating that the notable finding in the present study was not caused by limitations related to this study (abstr.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…On the other hand, midmyocardial layer strain was lower in hypertensive patients than in controls and WCH patients. Kim and colleagues 21 recently demonstrated that LV longitudinal strain in all three layers (subendocardial, midmyocardial, and subepicardial) were lower in hypertensive patients, whereas Ishizu and colleagues 22 showed that LV wall strain changings were accompanied by myocyte hypertrophy and fibrosis from subendocardium to epicardium in an animal model. The latter study revealed that longitudinal strain is associated with subendocardial layer fibrosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%