Table 1.
Strain values (%) | Differences endo-epic. strain | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study | Indication | CAG | CAD+ | CAD- | p-value | CAD+ | CAD- | p-value | AUC for CAD+, TLS/GCS (%) |
Sarvari [23] | Suspected NSTE-ACS n = 77 | CAD+ n = 49 | TLS: −14.0 ± 3.3 | −19.2 ± 2.2 | <0.001 | Δ2.4 ± 3.6 | Δ5.3 ± 2.1 | <0.001 | Endocardial: 0.91/0.85 |
CAD- n = 28 | GCS: −19.3 ± 4.0 | - 24.3 ± 3.4 | <0.001 | Δ2.4 ± 3.7 | Δ10.4 ± 3.0 | <0.001 | Mid-myocardial: 0.91/0.87 | ||
GLS: −15.3 ± 2.2 | −19.2 ± 2.2 | <0.001 | Δ2.4 ± 3.8 | Δ5.3 ± 2.1 | <0.001 | Epicardial: 0.79/0.68 |
Strain values and differences between andocardial and epicardial strain are presented as mean ± SD
NSTE-ACS Non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome, CAG Coronary angiography, CAD+ Coronary artery disease, defined as coronary artery stenosis ≥ 50 %, TLS Territorial longitudinal strain, GCS Global circumferential strain, endo endocardial, epic epicardial, AUC Area under the curve for ROC analysis of prediction of CAD being present or not