Abstract
Background: The assessment of the longitudinal component of left ventricular (LV) function is of major clinical importance for the early detection of LV contractile impairment. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of uncontrolled hypertension, on LV longitudinal systolic performance.
Methods: The study population included 400 hypertensive patients: 271 patients with uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) and 112 without controlled BP, all patients underwent a complete ultrasound evaluation with the calculation of the LV mass, evaluation of diastolic function as well as longitudinal systolic function.
Results: Conventional echo demonstrated that uncontrolled patients had increased LV mass (P 0.007), LA (left auricular) dimension (P 0.004), left ventricular wall thickness and impairment of diastolic function (E/E’6 ± 2.1 vs 7.4 ±3.0 P=0.001) while no affection of systolic function could be detected. By deformation imaging, there was a reduction in longitudinal strain (apical 4 view -16.2 ±2.9 vs -18.2± 2.6 P 0.02, apical 3 view -17.3 ± 3.3 vs. -18.9 ± 4.1 P 0.01). Similarly, systolic strain rate (SRsys) and early diastolic SR (SRe) reduced significantly in longitudinal direction.
Conclusion: Although EF was not different between uncontrolled patients and controls, LV longitudinal strain and strain rate by 2D speckle tracking were lower in the uncontrolled group.
Keywords: Uncontrolled hypertension, echocardiography, strain, systolic, ventricle, LV mass.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1996.03530440037034] [PMID: 8622246]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2006.01.023] [PMID: 16824996]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3819] [PMID: 27479676]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jash.2010.02.002] [PMID: 20374948]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2004.06.019] [PMID: 15452466]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.06.013] [PMID: 25129519]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.19.2560] [PMID: 12748199]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2005.10.005] [PMID: 16376782]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1000885] [PMID: 10455470]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejechocard/jep007] [PMID: 19270053]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm037] [PMID: 17428822]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeu184] [PMID: 25525063]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.06.012] [PMID: 27743951]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2047487317721644]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282dc7549] [PMID: 17921815]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jch.12638] [PMID: 26234374]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/hr.2016.191] [PMID: 28123182]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12114]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.95.6.1464] [PMID: 9118514]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283531eaf] [PMID: 22499289]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MBP.0b013e3282faa732] [PMID: 18347441]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2017.01.021] [PMID: 28258906]
[PMID: 23264785]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.10.158] [PMID: 25464444]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.1201] [PMID: 21862747]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301388] [PMID: 22543839]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.02.048] [PMID: 16781359]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2012.12.009] [PMID: 23438612]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.repce.2013.07.013] [PMID: 24405559]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2008.10.006] [PMID: 19041574]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8175.2011.01410.x] [PMID: 21676016]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/CMC.S38407] [PMID: 27385916]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/echo.13289] [PMID: 27385662]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jash.2016.06.032] [PMID: 27461398]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2014.04.005]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1570161115666170414120532] [PMID: 28413968]