4.5 Article

Association of Carotid Arterial Circumferential Strain With Left Ventricular Function and Hemodynamic Compromise During Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Journal

CIRCULATION JOURNAL
Volume 78, Issue 10, Pages 2422-2430

Publisher

JAPANESE CIRCULATION SOC
DOI: 10.1253/circj.CJ-14-0378

Keywords

Circumferential strain; Left ventricular function; Off-pump coronary artery bypass; Vascular stiffness

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Considering the importance of ventricular-vascular coupling, a measure of arterial stiffness may reflect global myocardial performance. We evaluated the predictive value of common carotid arterial circumferential strain (CCA CirS), measured with ultrasound speckle tracking, for hemodynamic deterioration during off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) and assessed its association with echocardiographic indices of myocardial function. Methods and Results: Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >= 50% were enrolled. Intraoperative hemodynamic variables were compared in relation to CCA CirS tertiles. A total of 96 patients were analyzed. Mixed venous oxygen saturation (SvO2) during left circumflex artery grafting and sternum closure were lower in the first tertile than in the third tertile. On univariate logistic regression female gender, ratio of early transmitral velocity to annular velocity, pulse pressure, and CCA CirS were predictors of hemodynamic deterioration (defined as decrease in SvO2 >= 20%), while only CCA CirS remained as an independent predictor after multivariate analysis (OR, 0.27; 95% CI: 0.11-0.68). Area under the curve of CCA CirS for its prediction was 0.730 (95% CI: 0.608-0.852). CCA CirS was strongly associated with tissue Doppler-derived parameters of LV function. Conclusions: CCA CirS is a comprehensive marker reflecting LV function, and a predictor for hemodynamic deterioration during OPCAB in patients with preserved LVEF.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available