Background

Right ventricular peak systolic longitudinal strain (RVLS) has emerged as an approach for quantifying right ventricular function in diseases such as pulmonary hypertension and congenital heart disease. A major limitation in applying RVLS is that strain imaging and analysis are proprietary, which may result in systematic differences from vendor to vendor. The goal of this study was to test the reproducibility of right ventricular strain analysis among selected vendor-specific software (VSS) and vendor-independent software (VIS) on images obtained from different ultrasound scanners, as would be common in clinical practice or in a multicenter clinical trial.

Methods

In this prospective, single-center study, 35 patients (5 healthy subjects and 30 with pulmonary hypertension) each underwent two echocardiographic scans, one using GE (Vivid E9) and the other using Philips (iE33) ultrasound systems. Images were analyzed using both VSS and VIS (TomTec) software for determination of RVLS. A repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to assess for any systematic differences among methods, as well as effects of scanner and software and a possible interaction between scanner and software for each strain measurement.

Results

Differences for global strains were not statistically significant among VSS packages (P ≥ .05), but some differences were noted between VSS and VIS. Wide variability between regional peak strain measurements was noted, but no systematic differences were found.

Conclusions

Global RVLS values between VSS systems are not significantly different but may differ slightly from VIS. When comparing regional strain between VSS and VIS analyses, there is widespread variability without clear systematic differences.

中文翻译：

---

使用依赖于供应商和独立于供应商的软件的右心室纵向应变可再现性

背景

右心室收缩期收缩期纵向纵向应变（RVLS）已经出现，它是量化肺动脉高压和先天性心脏病等疾病中右心室功能的一种方法。应用RVLS的主要限制是应变成像和分析是专有的，这可能会导致卖方之间的系统差异。这项研究的目的是测试从不同的超声扫描仪获得的图像上所选卖方专用软件（VSS）和卖方独立软件（VIS）之间右心室应变分析的可重复性，这在临床实践或临床实践中很常见。多中心临床试验。

方法

在这项前瞻性，单中心研究中，分别对35例患者（5名健康受试者和30例肺动脉高压）进行了两次超声心动图扫描，一个使用GE（Vivid E9），另一个使用Philips（iE33）超声系统。使用VSS和VIS（TomTec）软件分析图像以确定RVLS。使用方差的重复测量分析来评估方法之间的任何系统差异，以及扫描仪和软件的效果以及每次应变测量中扫描仪和软件之间可能的交互作用。

结果

全球株差异不VSS包（有统计学显著P  ≥0.05），但有些差异VSS和VIS之间注意到。注意到区域峰值应变测量之间存在很大差异，但未发现系统差异。

结论

VSS系统之间的全局RVLS值没有显着差异，但可能与VIS略有不同。当比较VSS和VIS分析之间的区域应变时，存在广泛的变异性，而没有明显的系统差异。