Background: Left ventricular (LV) longitudinal dysfunction has been identified in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with preserved LV ejection fraction (LVEF). However, the impact of T2DM on LV longitudinal function or the association of LV longitudinal function with outcome for dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) remains unclear. Methods: We retrospectively studied 206 patients with non-ischemic DCM, mean age of 59 ± 17 years and LVEF of 31 ± 8% (all < 45%). All patients underwent a standard echocardiographic examination, and LV longitudinal function was assessed in terms of global longitudinal strain (GLS). Long-term outcomes were assessed, with a median followup period of 6.2 years, as primary endpoints of death from or hospitalization for deteriorating heart failure. Results: GLS of DCM patients with T2DM (n = 55) was significantly lower than that in DCM patients without T2DM (n = 151) in spite of similar conventional LV function (7.0 ± 2.0% vs. 7.8 ± 2.2%, p = 0.03). Kaplan-Meier curves indicated that long-term outcomes for DCM patients without T2DM were better than for those with T2DM (log-rank p = 0.001). Subdividing the two groups into four with by using the median value of GLS (7.9%) showed long-term outcome was worst for DCM patients with T2DM and low GLS. Cox proportional hazards analyses demonstrated an independent association of T2DM, GLS and left atrial volume index with long-term outcome. Moreover, multiple regression analysis for the association of GLS showed that T2DM was the independent determinant parameter for GLS as well as for LVEF and left atrial volume index. Conclusion: Management of DCM patients with T2DM may be improved by using GLS guidance.

BackgroundCoexistence of left ventricular (LV) longitudinal myocardial systolic dysfunction with LV diastolic dysfunction could lead to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Diabetes mellitus (DM) is known as a significant factor associated with HFpEF. Although the mechanisms of DM-related LV myocardial injury are complex, it has been postulated that overweight contributes to the development of LV myocardial injury in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. However, the precise impact of overweight on LV longitudinal myocardial systolic function in T2DM patients remains unclear.MethodsWe studied 145 asymptomatic T2DM patients with preserved LV ejection fraction (LVEF) without coronary artery disease. LV longitudinal myocardial systolic function was assessed by global longitudinal strain (GLS), which was defined as the average peak strain of 18-segments obtained from standard apical views. Overweight was defined as body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m2. Ninety age-, gender- and LVEF-matched healthy volunteers served as controls.ResultsGLS of overweight T2DM patients was significantly lower than that of non-overweight patients (17.9 ± 2.4% vs. 18.9 ± 2.6%, p < 0.05), whereas GLS of both overweight and non-overweight controls was similar (19.8 ± 1.3% vs. 20.4 ± 2.1%, p = 0.38). Furthermore, multiple regression analysis revealed that for T2DM patients, BMI was the independent determinant parameters for GLS as well as LV mass index.ConclusionsOverweight has a greater effect on LV longitudinal myocardial systolic function in T2DM patients than on that in non-DM healthy subjects. Our finding further suggests that the strict control of overweight in T2DM patients may be associated with prevention of the development of HFpEF.

Contractile reserve and diastolic reserve during leg-positive pressure stress are important determinants of cardiovascular outcomes for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Watchful observation or early therapeutic intervention with established cardioprotective medications may be necessary for patients with malignant lymphoma and preserved LVEF but with abnormal GLS.

Mid-term right ventricular (RV) reverse remodeling after treatment in patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) is associated with long-term outcome as well as baseline RV remodeling. However, baseline factors influencing mid-term RV reverse remodeling after treatment and its prognostic capability remain unclear. We studied 54 PH patients. Mid-term RV remodeling was assessed in terms of the RV area, which was traced planimetrically at the end-systole (RVESA). RV reverse remodeling was defined as a relative decrease in the RVESA of at least 15% at 10.2 ± 9.4 months after treatment. Long-term follow-up was 5 years. Adverse events occurred in ten patients (19%) and mid-term RV reverse remodeling after treatment was observed in 37 (69%). Patients with mid-term RV reverse remodeling had more favorable long-term outcomes than those without (log-rank: p = 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that RV relative wall thickness (RV-RWT), as calculated as RV free-wall thickness/RV basal linear dimension at end-diastole, was an independent predictor of mid-term RV reverse remodeling (OR 1.334; 95% CI, 1.039-1.713; p = 0.03). Moreover, patients with RV-RWT ≥0.21 showed better long-term outcomes than did those without (log-rank p = 0.03), while those with RV-RWT ≥0.21 and mid-term RV reverse remodeling had the best long-term outcomes. Patients with RV-RWT <0.21 and without mid-term RV reverse remodeling, on the other hand, had worse long-term outcomes than other sub-groups. In conclusions, RV-RWT could predict mid-term RV reverse remodeling after treatment in PH patients, and was associated with long-term outcomes. Our finding may have clinical implications for better management of PH patients.

SummaryAlthough right ventricular (RV) pacing is the only effective treatment for patients with symptomatic bradycardia, it creates left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony, which can induce LV dysfunction and heart failure. The current criterion for consideration of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ! 35%, but indication for CRT in patients required for RV pacing with LVEF > 35% remains unclear.We studied 40 patients, all LVEF "35%, who had undergone implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation with RV pacing < 5%. Echocardiography was performed at baseline and during RV pacing. LV dyssynchrony was defined as anteroseptal-to-posterior wall delay from the mid-LV short-axis view using twodimensional speckle-tracking radial strain (significant: "130 ms). Patients were divided into two groups based on baseline LVEF: normal LVEF ( "50%; n = 20) and mildly reduced LVEF (35-50%; n = 20).LVEF and LV dyssynchrony in patients with mildly reduced LVEF deteriorated significantly during RV pacing compared to those in patients with normal LVEF. Moreover, changes in LV dyssynchrony during RV pacing significantly correlated with changes in LVEF (r = -0.44, P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that baseline LVEF was the only independent predictor and baseline LVEF < 48% predictive of significant LV dyssynchrony during RV pacing.The extent of RV pacing-induced LV dysfunction may be associated with baseline LV function. These adverse effects on patients with mildly reduced LVEF of 35-50% and indications for RV pacing due to bradycardia can thus be prevented by CRT.(Int Heart J 2017; 58: 724-730) Key words: Echocardiography, Right ventricular pacing, Heart failure, Left ventricular function, Dyssynchrony A lthough right ventricular (RV) pacing is the only effective treatment for patients with symptomatic AV conduction disturbance, it causes left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony, which can induce LV dysfunction and heart failure (HF).1) The current criterion for consideration of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is LV ejection fraction (LVEF) !35%, but the indication for CRT required for RV pacing for patients with LVEF > 35% remains unclear. It was recently reported that CRT is being developed as a realistic treatment option to prevent LV dysfunction induced by RV pacing, even for symptomatic patients with bradycardia and normal LVEF.1-3) The adverse effects of RV pacing on patients with indications for RV pacing due to bradycardia may be prevented by CRT, but risk stratification of future LV dysfunction for such patients remains ambiguous. We therefore used a variety of patients, who had previously had had implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) implanted, to verify the following hypothesis; 1) the effect of RV pacing on LV performance including LVEF and LV dyssynchrony may differ depending on baseline LVEF; and 2) changes in LVEF during RV pacing correlate with those in LV dyssynchrony. MethodsStudy population: For this study, 54 consecutive patients with LVEF...

Assessment of preload reserve during LPP stress could facilitate risk stratification of patients with severe AS waiting for aortic valve intervention.

Background: Left ventricular (LV) longitudinal myocardial systolic dysfunction (LVSD) has been identified in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients, and it should be considered the first marker of a preclinical form of DM-related cardiac dysfunction. Overweight has been postulated to contribute to the development of LVSD in T2DM patients, but the impact of amount of body fat mass on LVSD in T2DM patients remains uncertain. Methods: We studied 71 asymptomatic T2DM patients with preserved LV ejection fraction (LVEF) (all !55%) without coronary artery disease. LVSD for T2DM patients with preserved LVEF was identified as global longitudinal strain (GLS) <18%. Body fat mass was measured with a commercially available body composition analyzer (In Body S-10, Biospace, Tokyo, Japan), and corrected by body surface area (BFI: body fat index). Results: Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body weight, body mass index (BMI), and BFI were all associated with LVSD, whereas multivariate logistic regression analysis showed BFI was the only variable independently associated with LVSD (OR 1.147; 95% CI 1.001-1.314; p = 0.027). For sequential logistic regression models to predict LVSD, clinical variables including age, DM duration, and HbA1c tended to be improved by addition of BMI, but without statistical significance (p = 0.09), while it was significantly improved by addition of BFI (p = 0.047). Conclusions: Using BFI for the control of body compression by means of a bioelectrical impedance assay is simple and easy-to-use, and this may have clinical implications for better management of T2DM patients with preserved LVEF to prevent future development of DM-related cardiac dysfunction.