Usefulness of Epicardial Area in the Short Axis to Identify Elevated Left Ventricular Mass in Men

• Published in: The American journal of cardiology Vol. 121; no. 12; pp. 1639 - 1644
• Main Authors: Fitzpatrick, Jesse K., Cohen, Beth E., Rosenblatt, Andrew, Shaw, Richard E., Schiller, Nelson B.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 15.06.2018; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Aged; Algorithms; Body mass index; Cardiovascular disease; Cardiovascular diseases; Cohort Studies; Confidence intervals; Correlation analysis; Echocardiography; Endocardium - diagnostic imaging; Endocardium - pathology; Family medical history; Heart; Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging; Heart Ventricles - pathology; Humans; Hypertension; Hypertrophy; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - diagnostic imaging; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - pathology; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - physiopathology; Male; Mathematical analysis; Middle Aged; Morbidity; Organ Size; Pericardium - diagnostic imaging; Pericardium - pathology; Population; Prospective Studies; R&D; Research & development; Stroke Volume; Studies; Ventricle; United States > US; San Francisco California; California
• ISSN: 0002-9149; 1879-1913; 1879-1913
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.02.058

Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy is strongly associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The 2-dimensional LV mass algorithms suffer from measurement variability that can lead to misclassification of patients with LV hypertrophy as normal, or vice versa. Among the 4 echocardiographic measurements required by the 2-dimensional LV mass algorithms, epicardial and endocardial area have the lowest interobserver variation and could be used to corroborate LV mass calculations. We sought cut-off values that are able to discriminate between elevated and normal LV mass based on endocardial or epicardial area alone. Using data from 664 men enrolled in the Mind Your Heart Study, we calculated the correlation of LV mass index with epicardial area and endocardial area. We then used receiver operator characteristic curves to identify epicardial and endocardial area cut-points that could discriminate subjects with normal LV mass and LV hypertrophy. LV mass index was more strongly correlated with epicardial area compared with endocardial area, r = 0.70 versus r = 0.27, respectively. Epicardial area had a significantly higher area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (p <0.001) compared with endocardial area, 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.86 to 0.93) versus 0.63 (95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.71). An epicardial area cut-point of ≥38.0 cm2 corresponded to a sensitivity of 95.0% and specificity of 54.4% for detecting LV hypertrophy. In conclusion, epicardial area showed promise as a method of rapid screening for LV hypertrophy and could be used to validate formal LV mass calculations.