Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS) in Elderly and Its Associated Factors.

BACKGROUND: cardiovascular disease is very common and can be fatal in elderly patients. It is often preceded by asymptomatic or subclinical left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Early detection of LVSD can reduce morbidity and mortality due to cardiovascular disease. One method used in the early detection of LVSD is an assessment of global longitudinal strain (GLS). This study aimed to determine the mean value of GLS and GLS-related factors. METHODS: this cross-sectional study was conducted among elderly patients aged > 60 years in the geriatric and cardiology clinic, Internal Medicine, CMH Hospital. Data were obtained from interviews, medical records, and transthoracic echocardiography examination. The variables of age, frailty, hypertension, coronary artery disease, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus were analyzed as the determinants of a decrease in GLS. Univariate analysis was conducted for each variable. Bivariate analysis was conducted using the chi-square test with a significance level of p<0.25 and confidence interval (CI) of 95%, and multivariate analysis used a logistic regression test. RESULTS: a total of 194 patients were admitted according to the study criteria, with a mean age of 66 years. The proportion of women was 60.8%. The study revealed that the determinants with p<0.25 are frailty, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus, with multivariate analysis frailty having an OR of 2.002 (95% CI 1.042-3.925) and diabetes mellitus having an OR of 2.278 (95% CI 1.033-5.025). CONCLUSION: the mean value of GLS among the elderly was -21.6% (minimum value -5.3% and maximum value 29.9%). The factors that influence the decrease of GLS are frailty and diabetes mellitus.

Mobile Cardiac Acoustic Monitoring System to Evaluate Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Pacemaker Patients.

The mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system is a promising tool to enable detection and assist the diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). The objective of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of electromechanical activation time (EMAT), an important cardiac acoustic biomarker, in quantifying LVSD among left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) patients using a mobile acoustic cardiography monitoring system. In this prospective single-center observational study, pacemaker-dependent patients were consecutively enrolled. EMAT, the time from the start of the pacing QRS wave to first heart sound (S1) peak; left ventricular systolic time (LVST), the time from S1 peak to S2 peak; and ECG were recorded simultaneously by the mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system. LVEF was measured by echocardiography. A logistic regression model was applied to evaluate the association between EMAT and reduced EF (LVEF < 50%). A total of 105 pacemaker-dependent patients participated. The RVAP group (n = 58) displayed a significantly higher EMAT than the LBBP group (n = 47) (150.95 ± 19.46 vs. 108.23 ± 12.26 ms, p < 0.001). Pearson correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant negative correlation between EMAT and LVEF (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed the sensitivity and specificity of detecting LVEF to be < 50% when EMAT ≥ 151 ms were 96.00% and 96.97% in the RVAP group. In LBBP patients, the sensitivity and specificity of using EMAT ≥ 110 ms as the cutoff value for the detection of LVEF < 50% were 75.00% and 100.00%. There was no significant difference in LVST with or without LVSD in the RVAP group (p = 0.823) and LBBP group (p = 0.086). Compared to LVST, EMAT was more helpful to identify LVSD in pacemaker-dependent patients. The cutoff point of EMAT for diagnosing LVEF < 50% differed regarding the pacing type. Therefore, the mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system can be used to identify the progress of LVSD in pacemaker patients.

Clinical Profile and Prognosis of a Real-World Cohort of Patients With Moderate or Severe Cancer Therapy-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction.

Introduction and Objectives: Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a common cause of cancer treatment withdrawal, related to the poor outcomes. The cardiac-specific treatment could recover the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We analyzed the clinical profile and prognosis of patients with CTRCD in a real-world scenario. Methods: A retrospective study that include all the cancer patients diagnosed with CTRCD, defined as LVEF < 50%. We analyzed the cardiac and oncologic treatments, the predictors of mortality and LVEF recovery, hospital admission, and the causes of mortality (cardiovascular (CV), non-CV, and cancer-related). Results: We included 113 patients (82.3% women, age 49.2 ± 12.1 years). Breast cancer (72.6%) and anthracyclines (72.6%) were the most frequent cancer and treatment. Meantime to CTRCD was 8 months, with mean LVEF of 39.4 ± 9.2%. At diagnosis, 27.4% of the patients were asymptomatic. Cardiac-specific treatment was started in 66.4% of patients, with LVEF recovery-rate of 54.8%. Higher LVEF at the time of CTRCD, shorter time from cancer treatment to diagnosis of CTRCD, and younger age were the predictors of LVEF recovery. The hospitalization rate was 20.4% (8.8% linked to heart failure). Treatment with trastuzumab and lower LVEF at diagnosis of CTRCD were the predictors of mortality. Thirty point nine percent of patients died during the 26 months follow-up. The non-CV causes and cancer-related were more frequent than CV ones. Conclusions: Cardiac-specific treatment achieves LVEF recovery in more than half of the patients. LVEF at the diagnosis of CTRCD, age, and time from the cancer treatment initiation to CTRCD were the predictors of LVEF recovery. The CV-related deaths were less frequent than the non-CV ones. Trastuzumab treatment and LVEF at the time of CTRCD were the predictors of mortality.

Dual-site right ventricular and left ventricular pacing in a patient with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and atrial fibrillation using a standard CRT-D device.

UNLABELLED: In patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) implantation for left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) accompanied by permanent atrial fibrillation (AF), generally, the unused atrial port is plugged at device implantation. We describe an alternative use for the atrial-port in this case report. A 43 year old gentleman with LVSD due to left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC) and AF of unknown duration underwent a CRT-D implantation after optimization of cardiac failure treatment. The atrial-port which would otherwise have been plugged was connected to a high right ventricular septal (RVS) pacing-lead and the shock-lead was positioned at the right ventricular apex (RVA). This approach permitted modified cardiac resynchronization in a high RVS to left ventricular (LV) and RVA pacing sequence using the high RVS and LV pacing combined with a shock vector including the RV apex. A standard CRT-D device with a minimum programmable A-V delay of 30 ms (technically RVS to LV delay in the 'DDD' pacing mode) was used. The device was programmed to a 'DDD' pacing mode (sequential multi-site ventricular pacing with some programmability). The mode switch operation was programmed 'OFF' since atrial sensing is unavailable. Device-delivered shocks did not cardiovert the patient back to sinus rhythm suggesting that the AF was permanent (no prior cardioversion attempts were made on the presumption that the chances of maintaining sinus rhythm, given the underlying cardiac condition, were low). Subsequently, the patient required radio-frequency ablation of the atrio-ventricular node for conducted AF. Symptomatic, echocardiographic and radiological improvement preceded atrio-ventricular node ablation. CONCLUSION: Amongst AF patients with permanent AF undergoing CRT-D implantation, those patients who are likely to have the CRT-D device atrial-ports plugged could benefit from having both the options of (i) a RVA shock vector as well as (ii) a high RVS-pacing feasible, by utilizing the atrial-port of a conventional CRTD device for a RVS pacing lead, should a RVA shock-lead position be preferred. New device programming algorithms will be necessary to make patient-customized programming in this lead configuration flexible, more useful clinically and easy.