Left atrial minimum volume and reservoir function as correlates of left ventricular diastolic function: Impact of left ventricular systolic function

Cesare Russo, Zhezhen Jin, Shunichi Homma, Tatjana Rundek, Mitchell S V Elkind, Ralph L Sacco, Marco R. Di Tullio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

114 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Left atrial (LA) maximum volume (LAV max) is an indicator of left ventricular (LV) diastolic function. However, LAV max is also influenced by systolic events, whereas the LA minimum volume (LAV min) is directly exposed to LV pressure. The authors hypothesised that LAV min may be a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: University hospital. Patients: 357 participants from a community-based cohort study. Methods: LA volumes and reservoir function, measured as total LA emptying volume (LAEV) and LA emptying fraction (LAEF), were assessed by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. LV diastolic function was assessed by trans-mitral early (E) and late (A) Doppler velocities and mitral early diastolic velocity by tissue-Doppler (e′). LV systolic function was assessed by LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) by speckle-tracking. Results: LAV min significantly increased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (p<0.001), whereas the increase in LAV max was less pronounced (p=0.07). LAEV and LAEF decreased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (both p<0.001). In linear regressions, LAV min and LAV max were significant predictors of E/e′, with higher parameter estimates for LAV min. In multivariate models, LAV minresulted strongly associated with E/e′ (β=0.45, p<0.001), whereas LAV max was not (β=-0.16, p=0.08). LA reservoir function was better associated with GLS than LVEF. In multivariate analyses, GLS was significantly associated with LAV max (β=-0.15, p=0.002), LAEV (β=-0.37, p<0.001) and LAEF (β=-0.28, p<0.001) but not with LAV min. Conclusions: LAV min is a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. The impact of LV longitudinal systolic function on LA reservoir function might explain the weaker relation between LAV max and LV diastolic function.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)813-820
Number of pages8
JournalHeart
Volume98
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2012

Fingerprint

Left Ventricular Function
Left Atrial Function
Three-Dimensional Echocardiography
Ventricular Pressure
Stroke Volume
Linear Models
Cohort Studies
Multivariate Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Left atrial minimum volume and reservoir function as correlates of left ventricular diastolic function : Impact of left ventricular systolic function. / Russo, Cesare; Jin, Zhezhen; Homma, Shunichi; Rundek, Tatjana; Elkind, Mitchell S V; Sacco, Ralph L; Di Tullio, Marco R.

In: Heart, Vol. 98, No. 10, 01.05.2012, p. 813-820.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Russo, Cesare ; Jin, Zhezhen ; Homma, Shunichi ; Rundek, Tatjana ; Elkind, Mitchell S V ; Sacco, Ralph L ; Di Tullio, Marco R. / Left atrial minimum volume and reservoir function as correlates of left ventricular diastolic function : Impact of left ventricular systolic function. In: Heart. 2012 ; Vol. 98, No. 10. pp. 813-820.
@article{6b4b3d3fa1384dadaa2870dc2c53253e,
title = "Left atrial minimum volume and reservoir function as correlates of left ventricular diastolic function: Impact of left ventricular systolic function",
abstract = "Objective: Left atrial (LA) maximum volume (LAV max) is an indicator of left ventricular (LV) diastolic function. However, LAV max is also influenced by systolic events, whereas the LA minimum volume (LAV min) is directly exposed to LV pressure. The authors hypothesised that LAV min may be a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: University hospital. Patients: 357 participants from a community-based cohort study. Methods: LA volumes and reservoir function, measured as total LA emptying volume (LAEV) and LA emptying fraction (LAEF), were assessed by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. LV diastolic function was assessed by trans-mitral early (E) and late (A) Doppler velocities and mitral early diastolic velocity by tissue-Doppler (e′). LV systolic function was assessed by LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) by speckle-tracking. Results: LAV min significantly increased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (p<0.001), whereas the increase in LAV max was less pronounced (p=0.07). LAEV and LAEF decreased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (both p<0.001). In linear regressions, LAV min and LAV max were significant predictors of E/e′, with higher parameter estimates for LAV min. In multivariate models, LAV minresulted strongly associated with E/e′ (β=0.45, p<0.001), whereas LAV max was not (β=-0.16, p=0.08). LA reservoir function was better associated with GLS than LVEF. In multivariate analyses, GLS was significantly associated with LAV max (β=-0.15, p=0.002), LAEV (β=-0.37, p<0.001) and LAEF (β=-0.28, p<0.001) but not with LAV min. Conclusions: LAV min is a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. The impact of LV longitudinal systolic function on LA reservoir function might explain the weaker relation between LAV max and LV diastolic function.",
author = "Cesare Russo and Zhezhen Jin and Shunichi Homma and Tatjana Rundek and Elkind, {Mitchell S V} and Sacco, {Ralph L} and {Di Tullio}, {Marco R.}",
year = "2012",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301388",
language = "English",
volume = "98",
pages = "813--820",
journal = "Heart",
issn = "1355-6037",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Left atrial minimum volume and reservoir function as correlates of left ventricular diastolic function

T2 - Impact of left ventricular systolic function

AU - Russo, Cesare

AU - Jin, Zhezhen

AU - Homma, Shunichi

AU - Rundek, Tatjana

AU - Elkind, Mitchell S V

AU - Sacco, Ralph L

AU - Di Tullio, Marco R.

PY - 2012/5/1

Y1 - 2012/5/1

N2 - Objective: Left atrial (LA) maximum volume (LAV max) is an indicator of left ventricular (LV) diastolic function. However, LAV max is also influenced by systolic events, whereas the LA minimum volume (LAV min) is directly exposed to LV pressure. The authors hypothesised that LAV min may be a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: University hospital. Patients: 357 participants from a community-based cohort study. Methods: LA volumes and reservoir function, measured as total LA emptying volume (LAEV) and LA emptying fraction (LAEF), were assessed by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. LV diastolic function was assessed by trans-mitral early (E) and late (A) Doppler velocities and mitral early diastolic velocity by tissue-Doppler (e′). LV systolic function was assessed by LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) by speckle-tracking. Results: LAV min significantly increased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (p<0.001), whereas the increase in LAV max was less pronounced (p=0.07). LAEV and LAEF decreased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (both p<0.001). In linear regressions, LAV min and LAV max were significant predictors of E/e′, with higher parameter estimates for LAV min. In multivariate models, LAV minresulted strongly associated with E/e′ (β=0.45, p<0.001), whereas LAV max was not (β=-0.16, p=0.08). LA reservoir function was better associated with GLS than LVEF. In multivariate analyses, GLS was significantly associated with LAV max (β=-0.15, p=0.002), LAEV (β=-0.37, p<0.001) and LAEF (β=-0.28, p<0.001) but not with LAV min. Conclusions: LAV min is a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. The impact of LV longitudinal systolic function on LA reservoir function might explain the weaker relation between LAV max and LV diastolic function.

AB - Objective: Left atrial (LA) maximum volume (LAV max) is an indicator of left ventricular (LV) diastolic function. However, LAV max is also influenced by systolic events, whereas the LA minimum volume (LAV min) is directly exposed to LV pressure. The authors hypothesised that LAV min may be a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: University hospital. Patients: 357 participants from a community-based cohort study. Methods: LA volumes and reservoir function, measured as total LA emptying volume (LAEV) and LA emptying fraction (LAEF), were assessed by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. LV diastolic function was assessed by trans-mitral early (E) and late (A) Doppler velocities and mitral early diastolic velocity by tissue-Doppler (e′). LV systolic function was assessed by LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) by speckle-tracking. Results: LAV min significantly increased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (p<0.001), whereas the increase in LAV max was less pronounced (p=0.07). LAEV and LAEF decreased with worsening diastolic dysfunction (both p<0.001). In linear regressions, LAV min and LAV max were significant predictors of E/e′, with higher parameter estimates for LAV min. In multivariate models, LAV minresulted strongly associated with E/e′ (β=0.45, p<0.001), whereas LAV max was not (β=-0.16, p=0.08). LA reservoir function was better associated with GLS than LVEF. In multivariate analyses, GLS was significantly associated with LAV max (β=-0.15, p=0.002), LAEV (β=-0.37, p<0.001) and LAEF (β=-0.28, p<0.001) but not with LAV min. Conclusions: LAV min is a better correlate of LV diastolic function than LAV max. The impact of LV longitudinal systolic function on LA reservoir function might explain the weaker relation between LAV max and LV diastolic function.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860895290&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84860895290&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301388

DO - 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301388

M3 - Article

C2 - 22543839

AN - SCOPUS:84860895290

VL - 98

SP - 813

EP - 820

JO - Heart

JF - Heart

SN - 1355-6037

IS - 10

ER -