Echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony and correlation with QRS width in chronic heart failure.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Lilia Zakhama
Sana Neffati
Elhem Boussabeh
Besma Boukhris
Rim Saad
Ali Jendoubi
Emna Bennour
Soraya BenYoussef

Abstract

Background: Echocardiographic parameters of mechanical dyssynchrony may improve patients selection for cardiac resynchronisation therapy in chronic heart failure.
Aim : This study aimed to define the prevalence of inter, intra and atrio-ventricular dyssynchrony in heart failure patients with different QRS duration and to evaluate inter and intra-observer variability in collecting different echocardiographic dyssynchony parameters.
Methods : Twenty patients with chronic heart failure of any origin, NYHA functional class II-III with LVEF < 40%, were evaluated by complete echocardiographic examination including tissue Doppler imaging (DTI) and Tissue Tracking.
Results: Three patients had an atrio-ventricular dyssynchrony with a mean left ventricular filling time to cardiac cycle of 33 ± 5%. Six patients had an interventricular mechanical delay (IVMD) ³ 40 milliseconds, all of them had a QRS duration ³ 120 milliseconds. Overall, no statistically significant correlation was found between
IVMD and QRS duration (r=0.35, p=0.4). The mean septal to posterior wall-motion delay (SPWMD) was 83 ± 64 ms. 7 patients had SPWMD ³ 130 ms. The baseline QRS duration did not correlatewith SPWMD (p=0.7). The mean LV dyssynchrony determined by ÆS-peak was 74 ± 42 ms. Seven patients had LV dyssynchrony.
Linear regression did not demonstrate a relation between QRS width and intraventricular dyssynchrony (p=0.34). There was no concordance between intra-ventricular spatial or longitudinal dyssynchrony determined by DTI method and by Tissue Tracking (p=0.3 and 0.6 respectively). The intraobserver reproducibility of
LVFT/RR, IVMD and ÆS-peak (ICC= 0.99, 0.98 and 0.99, respectively), as well as the interobserver reproducibility (ICC: 0.96, 0.94 and 0.92, respectively), were very high. However, we observed a high variability for SPWMD measure (ICC=0.27, p=0.31).
Conclusion : Mechanical dyssynchrony did not correlate with QRS duration, despite the poor variability in collecting different echocardiographic parameters.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL and al. MIRACLE Study Group. Multicenter Insync Randomized Clinical Evaluation. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002; 346:1845-53.
  2. Cleland JGF, Daubert JC, Erdmann E and al. The effect of cardiac resynchronization on morbidity and mortality in heart failure (CARE-HF study). N Engl J Med 2005; 352:1539-49.
  3. Vardas PE, Auricchio A, Blanc JJ and al. Guidelines for cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronisation therapy. The task force for the cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronisation therapy of the European Society of Cardiology developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur Heart J 2007; 28:2256-95.
  4. Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, Ellenbogen KA and al. ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for Device-Based Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:e1-62.
  5. Yu CM, Abraham WT, Bax JJ and al. Predictors of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (PROSPECT)—study design. Am Heart J 2005;149:600-5
  6. Chung ES, Angel R, Tavazzi L and al. Results of the predictors of response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy (PROSPECT trial). Circulation 2008; 117: 2608- 2616.
  7. Gorcsan J, Abraham T, Agler DA and al. Echocardiography for cardiac resynchronisation therapy: Recommendations for performance and reporting. A report from the American Society of Echocardiography Dyssynchrony Writing Group endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am soc echocardiogr 2008; 21:191-213.
  8. Pitzalis MV, Lacoviello, Romito R and al. Cardiac resynchronisation therapy tailored by echocardiographic evaluation of ventricular asynchrony. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 40:1615-22.
  9. Cazeau S, Bordachar P, Jauvert G and al. Echocardiographic modeling of cardiac dyssynchrony before and during multisite stimulation: a prospective study. PACE 2003;26:137-43.
  10. Bax JJ, Bleeker GB, Marwick TH and al. Left ventricular dyssynchrony predicts response and prognosis after cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44:1834-40.
  11. Laffite S. La stimulation multisite revisitée par échocardiographie. mt cardio 2006; 2:447-457.
  12. Bank AJ, Aaron SK. Tissue Doppler imaging and left ventricular dyssynchrony in heart failure. J Cardiac Failure 2006; 12:154-162.
  13. Rouleau F, Merheb M, Geffroy S and al. Echocardiographic assessment of the interventricular delay of activation and correlation to the QRS width in dilated cardiomyopathy. PACE 2001; 24:1500-6.
  14. Ghio S, Constantin C, Klersy C and al. interventricular and intraventricular dyssynchrony are common in heart failure patients regardless of QRS duration. Eur Heart J 2004; 25:571-78.
  15. Yu CM, Fung JW, Zhang Q and al. Tissue Doppler imaging is superior to strain rate imaging and postsystolic shortening on the prediction of reverse remodeling in both ischemic and nonischemic heart failure after cardiac resynchronization therapy. Circulation 2004; 110:66-73.
  16. Yu CM, Fung WH, Lin H and al. Predictors of left ventricular reverse remodeling after cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure secondary to idiopathic dilated or ischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 2003 ;91:684-88.
  17. Haghjoo M, Bagherzadeh A, Fazelifar AF and al. Prevalence of mechanical dyssynchrony in heart failure patients with different QRS durations. PACE 2007; 30: 616-22.