E/e' in relation to outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarction (MI) is a high-risk condition especially when filling pressure is raised, and earlier reports have suggested that E/e' is associated with poor outcome. However, whether E/e' predicts risk better than LVEF, which is the current standard of practice, is not known. We investigated this question in the largest and most rigorous study of MI patients so far. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 660 patients with ST-elevation MI (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and related E/e' to short-term mortality (in-hospital death), as well as long-term events at 2 years comprising (a) a composite of MI, stroke, heart failure, and death, and (b) death alone. Short-term models were adjusted for age, sex, and LVEF. Long-term models were adjusted for age, sex, diabetes, revascularization procedure, history of MI, hypertension, renal function, drugs on discharge, and LVEF. Elevated E/e'> 15 indicated higher risk of short-term events (n = 19:7.0% (95% confidence interval 3.4-10.8%) vs. 1.0% (0.3 - 2.3%); adjusted odds ratio 3.7 (1.3-10.5)). While elevated E/e' was also associated with long-term outcomes (n = 103 composite events: 15.9% (11.9% - 21.4%) vs 6.8% (5.2% - 8.7%), P < .001; n = 38 death events: 6.0% (3.9% - 9.5%) vs 2.0% (1.3% - 3.2%), P = .001), E/e' was rendered nonsignificant for long-term outcomes by multivariable adjustment (p = ns for both). LVEF, on the contrary, was a highly significant predictor in the adjusted long-term model. CONCLUSION: E/e' is associated with poor outcome in STEMI, but LVEF is a stronger predictor of long-term risk.

Automated aortic Doppler flow tracing for reproducible research and clinical measurements.

In clinical practice, echocardiographers are often unkeen to make the significant time investment to make additional multiple measurements of Doppler velocity. Main hurdle to obtaining multiple measurements is the time required to manually trace a series of Doppler traces. To make it easier to analyze more beats, we present the description of an application system for automated aortic Doppler envelope quantification, compatible with a range of hardware platforms. It analyses long Doppler strips, spanning many heartbeats, and does not require electrocardiogram to separate individual beats. We tested its measurement of velocity-time-integral and peak-velocity against the reference standard defined as the average of three experts who each made three separate measurements. The automated measurements of velocity-time-integral showed strong correspondence (R(2) = 0.94) and good Bland-Altman agreement (SD = 1.39 cm) with the reference consensus expert values, and indeed performed as well as the individual experts ( R(2) = 0.90 to 0.96, SD = 1.05 to 1.53 cm). The same performance was observed for peak-velocities; ( R(2) = 0.98, SD = 3.07 cm/s) and ( R(2) = 0.93 to 0.98, SD = 2.96 to 5.18 cm/s). This automated technology allows > 10 times as many beats to be analyzed compared to the conventional manual approach. This would make clinical and research protocols more precise for the same operator effort.