Background: Speckle tracking is a relatively new, largely angle-independent technique used for the evaluation of myocardial longitudinal strain (LS). However, significant differences have been reported between LS values obtained by speckle tracking with the first generation of software products.
Aims: To compare LS values obtained with the most recently released equipment from two manufacturers.
Methods: Systematic scanning with head-to-head acquisition with no modification of the patient's position was performed in 64 patients with equipment from two different manufacturers, with subsequent off-line post-processing for speckle tracking LS assessment (Philips QLAB 9.0 and General Electric [GE] EchoPAC BT12). The interobserver variability of each software product was tested on a randomly selected set of 20 echocardiograms from the study population.
Results: GE and Philips interobserver coefficients of variation (CVs) for global LS (GLS) were 6.63% and 5.87%, respectively, indicating good reproducibility. Reproducibility was very variable for regional and segmental LS values, with CVs ranging from 7.58% to 49.21% with both software products. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) between GLS values was high at 0.95, indicating substantial agreement between the two methods. While good agreement was observed between midwall and apical regional strains with the two software products, basal regional strains were poorly correlated. The agreement between the two software products at a segmental level was very variable; the highest correlation was obtained for the apical cap (CCC 0.90) and the poorest for basal segments (CCC range 0.31-0.56).
Conclusions: A high level of agreement and reproducibility for global but not for basal regional or segmental LS was found with two vendor-dependent software products. This finding may help to reinforce clinical acceptance of GLS in everyday clinical practice.
Keywords: Echocardiography; Global longitudinal strain; Speckle tracking; Strain longitudinal global; Échocardiographie.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.