Search

An enlarged left atrial volume index (LAVI) at rest mirrors increased LA pressure and/or impairment of LA function. A cardiovascular stress may acutely modify left atrial volume (LAV) within minutes. Aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and functional correlates of LAV-stress echocardiography (SE) Out of 514 subjects referred to 10 quality-controlled labs, LAV-SE was completed in 490 (359 male, age 67 ± 12 years) with suspected or known chronic coronary syndromes (n = 462) or asymptomatic controls (n = 28). The utilized stress was exercise in 177, vasodilator in 167, dobutamine in 146. LAV was measured with the biplane disk summation method. SE was performed with the ABCDE protocol. The intra-observer and inter-observer LAV variability were 5% and 8%, respectively. ∆-LAVI changes (stress-rest) were negatively correlated with resting LAVI (r = - 0.271, p < 0.001) and heart rate reserve (r = -.239, p < 0.001). LAV-dilators were defined as those with stress-rest increase ≥ 6.8 ml/m 2 , a cutoff derived from a calculated reference change value above the biological, analytical and observer variability of LAVI. LAV dilation occurred in 56 patients (11%), more frequently with exercise (16%) and dipyridamole (13%) compared to dobutamine (4%, p < 0.01). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, B-lines ≥ 2 (OR: 2.586, 95% CI = 1.1293-5.169, p = 0.007) and abnormal contractile reserve (OR: 2.207, 95% CI = 1.111-4.386, p = 0.024) were associated with LAV dilation. In conclusion, LAV-SE is feasible with high success rate and low variability in patients with chronic coronary syndromes. LAV dilation is more likely with reduced left ventricular contractile reserve and pulmonary congestion.

The diffusion of smart-phones offers access to the best remote expertise in stress echo (SE). To evaluate the reliability of SE based on smart-phone filming and reading. A set of 20 SE video-clips were read in random sequence with a multiple choice six-answer test by ten readers from five different countries (Italy, Brazil, Serbia, Bulgaria, Russia) of the "SE2020" study network. The gold standard to assess accuracy was a core-lab expert reader in agreement with angiographic verification (0 = wrong, 1 = right). The same set of 20 SE studies were read, in random order and >2 months apart, on desktop Workstation and via smartphones by ten remote readers. Image quality was graded from 1 = poor but readable, to 3 = excellent. Kappa (k) statistics was used to assess intra- and inter-observer agreement. The image quality was comparable in desktop workstation vs. smartphone (2.0 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 0.7, p = NS). The average reading time per case was similar for desktop versus smartphone (90 ± 39 vs. 82 ± 54 s, p = NS). The overall diagnostic accuracy of the ten readers was similar for desktop workstation vs. smartphone (84 vs. 91%, p = NS). Intra-observer agreement (desktop vs. smartphone) was good (k = 0.81 ± 0.14). Inter-observer agreement was good and similar via desktop or smartphone (k = 0.69 vs. k = 0.72, p = NS). The diagnostic accuracy and consistency of SE reading among certified readers was high and similar via desktop workstation or via smartphone.