Abstract
The aims of this study was to assess the effect of using a four chamber versus a three plane model on speckle tracking derived global longitudinal strain, the effects of drift compensation, the effect of assessing strain in different layers and finally the interplay between these aspects for the assessment of strain in neonates. Speckle tracking derived longitudinal strain was obtained from 22 healthy neonates. ANOVA, Bland–Altman analyses, coefficients of variation and assessment of intraclass correlation coefficients were conducted to assess the effect of the abovementioned aspects as well as assess both inter-observer and intra-observer variability. Neither the use of the three plane model versus the four chamber model nor the use of drift compensation had a substantial effect on global longitudinal strain (less than 1%, depending on which layer was being assessed). A gradient was seen with increasing strain from the epicardial to endocardial layers, similar to what is seen in older subjects. Finally, drift compensation introduced more discrepancy in segmental strain values compared to global longitudinal strain. Global longitudinal strain in healthy neonates remains reasonably consistent regardless of whether the three plane or four chamber model is used and whether drift compensation is applied. Its value increases when one moves from the endocardial to the epicardial layer. Finally, drift compensation introduces more discrepancy for regional measures of longitudinal strain compared to global longitudinal strain.
Highlights
STE derived strain measurements were introduced as a clinical measure in the early 2000s [1]
Endocardial global longitudinal strain (GLS) (− 22.3 ± 7.7%) was greater than midwall GLS (− 20.3 ± 7.0%), and midwall GLS was greater than epicardial GLS (− 18.6 ± 6.4%), irrespective of whether a 4ch or a three plane model was used, leading to a gradient in strain of 3.7% from the epicardial to the endocardial layer, p < 0.001
Inter-observer repeatability was in the good to excellent rage for three plane GLS, whereas
Summary
STE derived strain measurements were introduced as a clinical measure in the early 2000s [1]. Since it has rapidly gained traction as a measure of left ventricular function, and is included in adult echocardiographic guidelines [2]. Optimal application of STE requires an understanding of which factors affect STE measurements. Lack of such understanding could lead to misinterpretation of strain values; changes in strain values due to image acquisition or processing factors could be falsely attributed to a change in cardiac function
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
