Limits...
Strain echocardiography in septic shock - a comparison with systolic and diastolic function parameters, cardiac biomarkers and outcome.

De Geer L, Engvall J, Oscarsson A - Crit Care (2015)

Bottom Line: The correlation of GLPS to left ventricular systolic and diastolic function parameters, cardiac biomarkers and clinical data were compared using Spearman's correlation test and linear regression analysis, and the ability of GLPS to predict outcome was evaluated using a logistic regression model.In LVEF and NT-proBNP there was a significant improvement during the study period (analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures, p = 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively), but not in GLPS, which remained unchanged over time (p = 0.10).GLPS did not correlate to the improvement in clinical characteristics over time, did not differ significantly between survivors and non-survivors (-17.4 (-20.5-(-13.7)) vs. -14.7 (-19.0 - (-10.6)), p = 0.11), and could not predict mortality.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden. lina.de.geer@regionostergotland.se.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Myocardial dysfunction is a well-known complication in septic shock but its characteristics and frequency remains elusive. Here, we evaluate global longitudinal peak strain (GLPS) of the left ventricle as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in septic shock.

Methods: Fifty adult patients with septic shock admitted to a general intensive care unit were included. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed on the first day, and repeated during and after ICU stay. Laboratory and clinical data and data on outcome were collected daily from admission and up to 7 days, shorter in cases of death or ICU discharge. The correlation of GLPS to left ventricular systolic and diastolic function parameters, cardiac biomarkers and clinical data were compared using Spearman's correlation test and linear regression analysis, and the ability of GLPS to predict outcome was evaluated using a logistic regression model.

Results: On the day of admission, there was a strong correlation and co-linearity of GLPS to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), mitral annular motion velocity (é) and to amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (Spearman's ρ -0.70, -0.53 and 0.54, and R(2) 0.49, 0.20 and 0.24, respectively). In LVEF and NT-proBNP there was a significant improvement during the study period (analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures, p = 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively), but not in GLPS, which remained unchanged over time (p = 0.10). GLPS did not correlate to the improvement in clinical characteristics over time, did not differ significantly between survivors and non-survivors (-17.4 (-20.5-(-13.7)) vs. -14.7 (-19.0 - (-10.6)), p = 0.11), and could not predict mortality.

Conclusions: GLPS is frequently reduced in septic shock patients, alone or in combination with reduced LVEF and/or é. It correlates with LVEF, é and NT-proBNP, and remains affected over time. GLPS may provide further understanding on the character of myocardial dysfunction in septic shock.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Association of echocardiographic and laboratory markers of myocardial dysfunction. The regression lines between global longitudinal peak strain and left ventricular ejection fraction, mitral annular motion velocity (é) and amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) on day 1.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4374340&req=5

Fig2: Association of echocardiographic and laboratory markers of myocardial dysfunction. The regression lines between global longitudinal peak strain and left ventricular ejection fraction, mitral annular motion velocity (é) and amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) on day 1.

Mentions: Table 2 shows the strong correlation of GLPS to LVEF, é, NT-proBNP and cardiac index on day 1. On the second echocardiogram, performed after initial stabilisation, and on the follow-up examination, the correlation was weaker. GLPS did not at any time correlate to SVRI or vasopressor dose, as measures of afterload, neither did it correlate to respiratory pressures, volume load or fluid balance, nor to SOFA score. Figure 2 shows the explanatory value of GLPS on echocardiographic parameters and NT-proBNP in a linear regression model. GLPS provided no explanatory value on clinical parameters.Table 2


Strain echocardiography in septic shock - a comparison with systolic and diastolic function parameters, cardiac biomarkers and outcome.

De Geer L, Engvall J, Oscarsson A - Crit Care (2015)

Association of echocardiographic and laboratory markers of myocardial dysfunction. The regression lines between global longitudinal peak strain and left ventricular ejection fraction, mitral annular motion velocity (é) and amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) on day 1.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4374340&req=5

Fig2: Association of echocardiographic and laboratory markers of myocardial dysfunction. The regression lines between global longitudinal peak strain and left ventricular ejection fraction, mitral annular motion velocity (é) and amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) on day 1.
Mentions: Table 2 shows the strong correlation of GLPS to LVEF, é, NT-proBNP and cardiac index on day 1. On the second echocardiogram, performed after initial stabilisation, and on the follow-up examination, the correlation was weaker. GLPS did not at any time correlate to SVRI or vasopressor dose, as measures of afterload, neither did it correlate to respiratory pressures, volume load or fluid balance, nor to SOFA score. Figure 2 shows the explanatory value of GLPS on echocardiographic parameters and NT-proBNP in a linear regression model. GLPS provided no explanatory value on clinical parameters.Table 2

Bottom Line: The correlation of GLPS to left ventricular systolic and diastolic function parameters, cardiac biomarkers and clinical data were compared using Spearman's correlation test and linear regression analysis, and the ability of GLPS to predict outcome was evaluated using a logistic regression model.In LVEF and NT-proBNP there was a significant improvement during the study period (analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures, p = 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively), but not in GLPS, which remained unchanged over time (p = 0.10).GLPS did not correlate to the improvement in clinical characteristics over time, did not differ significantly between survivors and non-survivors (-17.4 (-20.5-(-13.7)) vs. -14.7 (-19.0 - (-10.6)), p = 0.11), and could not predict mortality.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden. lina.de.geer@regionostergotland.se.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Myocardial dysfunction is a well-known complication in septic shock but its characteristics and frequency remains elusive. Here, we evaluate global longitudinal peak strain (GLPS) of the left ventricle as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in septic shock.

Methods: Fifty adult patients with septic shock admitted to a general intensive care unit were included. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed on the first day, and repeated during and after ICU stay. Laboratory and clinical data and data on outcome were collected daily from admission and up to 7 days, shorter in cases of death or ICU discharge. The correlation of GLPS to left ventricular systolic and diastolic function parameters, cardiac biomarkers and clinical data were compared using Spearman's correlation test and linear regression analysis, and the ability of GLPS to predict outcome was evaluated using a logistic regression model.

Results: On the day of admission, there was a strong correlation and co-linearity of GLPS to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), mitral annular motion velocity (é) and to amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (Spearman's ρ -0.70, -0.53 and 0.54, and R(2) 0.49, 0.20 and 0.24, respectively). In LVEF and NT-proBNP there was a significant improvement during the study period (analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures, p = 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively), but not in GLPS, which remained unchanged over time (p = 0.10). GLPS did not correlate to the improvement in clinical characteristics over time, did not differ significantly between survivors and non-survivors (-17.4 (-20.5-(-13.7)) vs. -14.7 (-19.0 - (-10.6)), p = 0.11), and could not predict mortality.

Conclusions: GLPS is frequently reduced in septic shock patients, alone or in combination with reduced LVEF and/or é. It correlates with LVEF, é and NT-proBNP, and remains affected over time. GLPS may provide further understanding on the character of myocardial dysfunction in septic shock.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus