Two methods are currently available for left atrial (LA) strain measurement by speckle tracking echocardiography, with two different reference timings for starting the analysis: QRS (QRS-LASr) and P wave (P-LASr). The aim of MASCOT HIT study was to define which of the two was more reproducible, more feasible, and less time consuming. In 26 expert centers, LA strain was analyzed by two different echocardiographers (young vs senior) in a blinded fashion. The study population included: healthy subjects, patients with arterial hypertension or aortic stenosis (LA pressure overload, group 2) and patients with mitral regurgitation or heart failure (LA volume–pressure overload, group 3). Difference between the inter-correlation coefficient (ICC) by the two echocardiographers using the two techniques, feasibility and analysis time of both methods were analyzed. A total of 938 subjects were included: 309 controls, 333 patients in group 2, and 296 patients in group 3. The ICC was comparable between QRS-LASr (0.93) and P-LASr (0.90). The young echocardiographers calculated QRS-LASr in 90% of cases, the expert ones in 95%. The feasibility of P-LASr was 85% by young echocardiographers and 88% by senior ones. QRS-LASr young median time was 110 s (interquartile range, IR, 78-149) vs senior 110 s (IR 78-155); for P-LASr, 120 s (IR 80-165) and 120 s (IR 90-161), respectively. LA strain was feasible in the majority of patients with similar reproducibility for both methods. QRS complex guaranteed a slightly higher feasibility and a lower time wasting compared to the use of P wave as the reference.

The speckle-tracking technique has become an easily accessible, quick-to-use, and straightforward tool for assessing advanced myocardial function. Achievements in the analysis of the left atrium have demonstrated that it plays an important role in the physiology and pathophysiology of the circulatory system. Deformation analysis allows the detection of even subtle functional abnormalities when atrial enlargement is not yet detected. Thus, left atrial strain has a documented diagnostic and prognostic value in many clinical scenarios. Furthermore, this technique is increasingly entering routine clinical practice. The analysis becomes possible thanks to new tools that simplify the speckle-tracking assessment. Left atrial strain improves diagnostic possibilities of standard echocardiographic examination, and its diagnostic and prognostic value is sometimes comparable with more advanced and less available techniques. In this review, we discuss the principles of performing strain analysis and the results of current research, and thus the potential possibilities of sophisticated atrial assessment application in various clinical scenarios.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and flutter (AFl) increase the risk of thromboembolism. The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of left atrial thrombus (LAT) in AF/AFl in relation to oral anticoagulation (OAC). Methods: LATTEE (NCT03591627) was a multicenter, prospective, observational study enrolling consecutive patients with AF/AFl referred for transesophageal echocardiography before cardioversion or ablation. Results: Of 3109 patients enrolled, 88% were on chronic, 1.5% on transient OAC and 10% without OAC. Of patients on chronic OAC, 39% received rivaroxaban, 30% dabigatran, 14% apixaban and 18% vitamin K antagonists (VKA). Patients on apixaban were oldest, had the worst renal function and were highest in both bleeding and thromboembolic risk, and more often received reduced doses. Prevalence of LAT was 8.0% (7.3% on chronic OAC vs. 15% without OAC; p < 0.01). In patients on VKA, prevalence of LAT was doubled compared to patients on non-VKA-OACs (NOACs) (13% vs. 6.0%; p < 0.01), even after propensity score weighting (13% vs. 7.5%; p < 0.01). Prevalence of LAT in patients on apixaban was higher (9.8%) than in those on rivaroxaban (5.7%) and dabigatran (4.7%; p < 0.01 for both comparisons), however, not after propensity score weighting. Conclusions: The prevalence of LAT in AF is non-negligible even on chronic OAC. The risk of LAT seems higher on VKA compared to NOAC, and similar between different NOACs.

Left ventricular systolic dysfunction characterized by both LVEF and LVGLS is an independent factor for LAAT. LA asynchrony provides additional diagnostic value for discriminating between patients with and without LAAT.

Objective:The aim of the study was to investigate whether the deformation of left atrium (LA) measured by speckle-tracking analysis (STE) is associated with the presence of LA appendage thrombus (LAAT) during non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF).Methods:Eighty-seven patients (mean age 67 years, 59% men) were included to retrospective cross-sectional study. On top of standard echocardiography we assessed: LA longitudinal systolic strain (LS), systolic (LSSR) and early diastolic strain rate (LESR) in four-chamber and two-chamber apical views. All patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography disclosing LAAT in 36 (41%) patients.Results:Subgroups with and without thrombi did not differ with regard to clinical characteristics. Univariate factors associated with LAAT were as follows: CH2ADS2-VASc Score, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), LV mass, and STE measurements. In a multivariate model only LVEF (p=0.002), LS (p=0.02), LESR (p=0.008), and LSSR (p=0.045) were independently associated with LAAT presence. Moreover, LVEF and LA STE measurements provided incremental value over the CH2ADS2-VASc Score.Conclusion:Speckle-tracking TTE may be used to describe LA reservoir and conduit function during AF, allowing the identification of patients with higher risk of LAAT and providing incremental value over the CH2ADS2-VASc Score.

This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially.

IntroductionEchocardiographic diagnosis of spontaneous intracardiac contrast is the reflection of interactions between erythrocytes and plasma proteins. Underlying conditions are associated with low blood flow velocities in the heart. We sought to determine whether spontaneous echo contrast (SEC) detected in the era of widespread use of harmonic imaging still reflects poor prognosis and risk of thromboembolism.Material and methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the database of a tertiary cardiology centre echocardiographic laboratory and identified 60 patients with SEC, but without solid intracardiac structures, and subsequently selected 60 sex- and age-matched controls without SEC. Data regarding baseline characteristics, treatment and clinical course during follow-up (median: 33.5 months; 95% CI: 24.79–40) were gained based on hospital and out-patient clinic documentation and telephone interviews. The clinical end-points included: all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), pulmonary embolism, peripheral embolism and composite thromboembolic end-point.ResultsWe observed that in the whole study group (p = 0.0016) and in the subgroup evaluated by TTE (p = 0.005) SEC predicted higher mortality. In the group assessed by TEE, SEC correlated with higher probability of stroke or TIA (p = 0.04). By multivariate analysis, in all patients SEC was a predictor of cardiovascular death (OR = 7.63; p = 0.008) and its localization in the left atrium independently predisposed to thromboembolism (OR = 10.15; p = 0.012). Furthermore, left ventricular SEC detected by TTE also emerged as an independent determinant of higher mortality (OR = 5.26; p = 0.015).ConclusionsDespite a lower threshold of detection using harmonic imaging SEC is still a risk factor of poor prognosis, especially when observed on transthoracic examination.

The definition of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has evolved from a clinically based "diagnosis of exclusion" to definitions focused on objective evidence of diastolic dysfunction and/ /or elevated left ventricular filling pressures. Despite advances in our understanding of HFpEF pathophysiology and the development of more sophisticated imaging modalities, the diagnosis of HFpEF remains challenging, especially in the chronic setting, given that symptoms are provoked by exertion and diagnostic evaluation is largely conducted at rest. Invasive hemodynamic study, and in particularinvasive exercise testing, is considered the reference method for HFpEF diagnosis. However, its use is limited as opposed to the high number of patients with suspected HFpEF. Thus, diagnostic criteria for HFpEF should be principally based on non-invasive measurements. As no single non-invasive variable can adequately corroborate or refute the diagnosis, different combinations of clinical, echocardiographic, and/or biochemical parameters have been introduced. Recent years have brought an abundance of HF-pEF definitions. Here, we present and compare four of them: 1) the 2016 European Society of Cardiology criteria for HFpEF; 2) the 2016 echocardiographic algorithm for diagnosing diastolic dysfunction; 3) the 2018 evidence-based H 2 FPEF score; and 4) the most recent, 2019 Heart Failure Association HFA-PEFF algorithm. These definitions vary in their approach to diagnosis, as well as sensitivity and specificity. Further studies to validate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of HFpEF definitions are warranted. Nevertheless, it seems that the best HFpEF definition would originate from a randomized clinical trial showing a favorable effect of an intervention on prognosis in HFpEF.