4938Left ventricular global longitudinal strain recovery predicts scar size reduction and systolic remodelling post ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Abstract

Abstract Background Left ventricular (LV) strain has prognostic utility following ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); however, serial changes in LV strain has not been evaluated post-infarct. We sought to determine the relationship between post-STEMI transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging derived scar size and LV systolic remodelling. Methods Following revascularisation, 172 first STEMI patients (85% male, 56.9±10.7 years) had paired TTE for GLS, and CMR to evaluate scar size and LV systolic function at baseline (2–7 days) and follow-up (8–10 weeks). Patients were divided into 3 groups according to absolute baseline GLS: group 1 (GLS ≥16%), group 2 (12%< GLS <16%), group 3 (GLS ≤12%). GLS recovery was defined as ≥10% increase in GLS at follow-up, excluding patients with normal baseline GLS. LV systolic adverse remodelling was defined as ≥15% increase in LVESV. LV systolic reverse remodelling was defined as ≥15% decrease in LVESV. Scar reduction was defined as ≥30% decrease in scar size. Results Group 1 and 2 had smaller follow-up scar size and higher LVEF compared to group 3 (p<0.0001 for both, see table). There was no difference in scar size reduction or systolic reverse remodeling among the baseline GLS groups (p>0.05 for both). Importantly, no patients from group 1 demonstrated systolic adverse remodelling. Relative change in GLS is significantly correlated with changes in LVEF (r=0.354, p<0.0001) and scar size (r=−0.262, p<0.0001), see figure. On multivariate binary logistic analysis, patients who demonstrated GLS recovery had greater reduction in scar size (OR=2.77 (1.09–7.01), p=0.032) and LV systolic reverse remodelling (OR=9.63 (1.21–76.41), p=0.032). Follow-up parameters within GLS groups All patients (n=172) Group 1 (n=47) Group 2 (n=72) Group 3 (n=53) Follow-up GLS, % 16.02±3.44 19.38±1.90 16.36±2.09 12.57±2.69 GLS recovery, n 110 (64%) 19 (40%) 53 (74%) 38 (72%) Follow-up scar size, % 7.67±5.40 5.01±3.38 6.27±3.73 12.02±6.24 Follow-up LVEF, % 51.80±10.20 57.83±6.95 54.14±8.02 43.26±9.83 Data presented as mean ± SD or n (%). Correlation graphs for change in GLS Conclusion Stratification of STEMI patients by baseline GLS was a determinant of CMR scar size as well as LV systolic function. However, the evaluation of GLS recovery could provide additional insights into reduction in scar size and LV systolic remodelling, both important prognostic markers. Thus, echocardiographic serial GLS evaluation may be a relevant non-invasive parameter, that is cheaper and more widely available for monitoring STEMI patients and guiding therapy.