Table 6 Prognostic values of 3D strain
From: A review of current trends in three-dimensional analysis of left ventricular myocardial strain
Author Year (Ref. #) | n | Etiology | 2DSTE | 3DSTE | Events | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chang 2014 [23] | 200 | Diverse | Not described | Toshiba | HF hospitalization or CD (n = 32) | 1) All 3D global strains were associated with outcomes. 2) 3D GLS and 3D GRS had an incremental value over 3D LVEF. |
Nagata 2015 [25] | 104 | Asymptomatic severe AS with preserved LVEF (> 50%) | TomTec | TomTec | MACE or AVR (n = 33) | 1) 2D GLS, 3D GLS, and 3D GRS were associated with outcomes. 2) AUC of 3D GLS was significantly larger than that of 2D GLS and 3D GRS. 3) 3D GLS was an only significant predictor after adjusting LV mass index and mean PG. |
Sun 2016 [96] | 66 | Hemodialysis | Not performed | TomTec | MACE (n = 23) | 3D GLS and 3D GRS were associated with MACE. |
Casaa-Rojo 2016 [84] | 45 | Asymptomatic severe MR with Preserved LVEF (> 60%) | Not performed | Toshiba | MACE, LVEF< 60% or MV surgery (n = 15) | 3D GLS, GAS, and GCS were associated with outcomes. |
Shin 2016 [95] | 96 | Acute MI | Toshiba | Toshiba | MACE (n = 12) | 3D GAS was associated with outcomes. |
Howard-Quijano 2017 [47] | 163 | Cardiac surgery | GE | GE | MACE (n = 34) | All 3D global strains were associated with MACE. |
Medvedofsky 2018 [97] | 416 | Diverse | Philips | TomTec | CV death (n = 114) | 1) 2D/3D LVEF, 2D/3D GLS were significantly associated with outcomes. 2) 3D GLS was the strongest predictor for CV mortality. |
Medvedofsky 2019 [98] | 104 | 30–50% of 2D LVEF | Philips | TomTec | CV death (n = 32) | 1) Not 2D LVEF/2D GLS and 3DLVEF but 3D GLS was associated with outcomes. |