Next Article in Journal
The Great Saphenous Vein Proximal Part: Branches, Anatomical Variations, and Their Implications for Clinical Practice and Venous Reflux Surgery
Previous Article in Journal
Cardiovascular Risk Factors Predicting Cardiovascular and Cancer Deaths in a Middle-Aged Population Followed-Up for 61 Years until Extinction
Previous Article in Special Issue
Myocardial Functional Imaging in Pediatric Nuclear Cardiology
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCDD
Volume 11
Issue 8
10.3390/jcdd11080241
jcdd-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Current and Clinically Relevant Echocardiographic Parameters to Analyze Left Atrial Function

by
Mario Mangia
1,†,
Emilio D’Andrea
1,†,
Antonella Cecchetto
1,
Riccardo Beccari
1,
Donato Mele
1 and
Stefano Nistri
1,2,*
1
Department of Cardiac Thoracic Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padua, 35128 Padova, Italy
2
Cardiology Service, CMSR Veneto Medica, 36077 Altavilla Vicentina, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2024, 11(8), 241; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11080241
Submission received: 25 April 2024 / Revised: 28 July 2024 / Accepted: 31 July 2024 / Published: 5 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in the Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Diseases)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The evaluation of the left atrial (LA) size using the LA volume index (LAVI) is clinically relevant due to its prognostic significance in various conditions. Nonetheless, adding a LA function assessment to the LAVI provides further clinical and prognostic information in different cardiovascular (CV) diseases. The assessment of LA function by echocardiography primarily includes volumetric measurements (LA ejection fraction [LAEF]), tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) (mitral annular late diastolic velocity [a’]), and speckle-tracking methods, such as LA longitudinal reservoir strain (LA strain). This review analyzes and discusses the current medical evidence and potential clinical usefulness of these different methods to analyze LA function.

1. Introduction

The evaluation of the left atrial (LA) size is key in any comprehensive transthoracic echocardiogram due to its prognostic value in different clinical conditions [1,2,3,4]. To date, the LA volume indexed for body surface area (LAVI) is preferred over the anteroposterior diameter, representing the most accurate measure of LA size by standard transthoracic echocardiography. Since the LA enlarges in the setting of increased left ventricular (LV) filling pressures, the LAVI is considered a good marker of diastolic dysfunction (DD) and is strongly associated with cardiovascular (CV) events [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12]. However, the LAVI does not necessarily mirror DD [13]. Indeed, we [14] and others [15,16] reported an upper limit of a normal LAVI in non-athletes, exceeding that suggested by guidelines [5]. Moreover, discrepancies have been reported among different methods to assess the LAVI [17]. Hence, both for clinical and research purposes, different echocardiographic methods cannot be used interchangeably for diagnosis and follow-up.
An assessment of LA functional parameters provides early insights into pathological changes, offering additional information as compared to the LAVI [7]. Different methods are used to assess LA function as follows: 2D and 3D volume-based approaches, transmitral and pulmonary veins spectral Doppler imaging, tissue Doppler imaging (TDI), strain and strain rates by TDI, and speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) [8,9]. However, the methods used for estimating LA function may be unpractical in everyday clinical activities, either due to the need for multiple measurements (beyond the LAVI) or to the dependence on the specific software available on dedicated workstations or board-only last-generation echocardiographic machines.
As mitral annular velocities are routinely measured by pulsed-wave TDI as a component of the assessment of diastolic function [18], the peak late diastolic velocity (TDI-a’) might be a candidate to assess LA function in everyday clinical practice [10,11] This review aims to summarize the updated knowledge on TDI-a’, exploring its potential role for evaluating LA function.

2. Left Atrial Function: An Introduction

The LA plays a key role in maintaining optimal cardiac performance by dynamically modulating LV filling. The interplay between LA and LV performance is characterized by the three following phases (Figure 1): (a) a “reservoir” phase, when blood moves from the pulmonary veins to the LA, achieving maximum volume (LAVI max); (b) a “conduit” phase in which blood passively shifts from the LA directly into the LV, leaving in the LA a “pre-atrial contraction” volume (LA pre-A); (c) a “booster pump” phase in which the LA actively shifts blood in the LV, reaching a minimum LA volume (LAVI min).
Studies of LA function provide new insights into the pathophysiologic and prognostic role of the LA in CV disease and outcomes [4,5,6,7,8,9], suggesting that LA functional measurements may be superior to the LA size in LV DD and can even precede volumetric changes [19,20,21]. LA function has been historically assessed by a variety of techniques, including time-honored systo-diastolic variations in M-mode LA tracings. Subsequently, volumetric approaches (first by 2D, more recently by 3D techniques) have been used to assess LA function alone (Table 1) [8] or in association with the LV outflow-tract velocity time integral (VTI)—the so-called LA function index (LAFI) [22].
An analysis of pulsed-wave Doppler flow velocities, recorded in the pulmonary veins (PVF) (LA filling) and mitral valve tips (LA emptying), may provide some estimation of LA function (Table 2).
The ratio of peak transmitral early (E) and late (A) transmitral velocities, or velocity time integral (VTI) and the atrial filling fraction (A-VTI/(E-VTI+A-VTI)), estimate the relative contribution of LA contraction to global LA function [23]. The ratio of systolic (S) to diastolic (D) PVF waves estimates the relative contribution of the reservoir to conduit function [24]. The extent and duration of the reversed pulmonary flow wave during atrial contraction (Ar) is used to estimate LA contraction. LA ejection force [25,26] and LA kinetic energy are used as markers of LA performance. The interpretation of transmitral and PVF patterns is, however, affected by the load conditions and heart rate, age, and LV diastolic properties [27,28,29].
The strain and strain rate using either TDI or STE, measure the extent and the rate of myocardial deformation and may be utilized to evaluate LA function [29,30]. TDI-based strain-rate imaging is challenging, as it is affected by the insonation angle and requires tracking with the motion of the wall to avoid the influence of the translational motion [31]. Despite these limitations, in expert hands feasibility is high, and multiple studies support its relevance in different contexts [19]. The introduction of STE has overcome the difficulties related to TDI-derived technologies [32]. The LA peak longitudinal strain (PALS) can be easily obtained by STE and reliably reflects the LA phasic function. LA strain has demonstrated an association with major CV outcomes in several clinical settings, including all stages of heart failure (HF) [33,34,35]. Normal values for 2D or 3D LA ejection fraction (LAEF) and the peak left atrial longitudinal strain have been explored by multiple studies; those with at least 300 patients are summarized in Table 3. In Figure 2 and Figure 3, calculations of LAEF (biplane 2D) and LA strain in a healthy subject and in a patient with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), respectively, are reported.

3. Left Atrial Ejection Fraction (LAEF)

Left atrial ejection fraction (LAEF), also known as left atrial emptying fraction, is calculated using the left atrial maximum volume (LAV max) at end-systole and minimum volume (LAV min) at end-diastole, following the formula (LAV max − LAV min)/LAV max. The volumes are measured in both apical four-chamber and apical two-chamber views. The choice of appropriate timing by ECG allows the examination of the global LA function as well as each of its components (Table 1, Figure 1) [44]. LAEF describes atrial functional remodeling more than LA enlargement and can be assessed by different imaging techniques such as 2D and 3D echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and computed tomography (CT) (Table 3 shows the normal values of 2D and 3D LAEF). Obtaining accurate and reproducible echocardiographic measures of LA function can be challenging due to multiple patient- and operator-dependent factors. Moreover, an echocardiographic assessment of heart volumes systematically underestimates the chamber size in comparison with CMR and CT [45]. Importantly, LAEF by echocardiography is widely available in multiple clinical scenarios and does not require dedicated software. Similarly to LV myocardial physiology, the Frank–Starling mechanism also applies to the LA myocardium and should be considered for the proper interpretation of LAEF data. For instance, it is well recognized that the longer the duration of AF, the more advanced the pathophysiological alterations, leading to increasing LA dilatation and dysfunction. The prognostic relevance of an echocardiographic LAEF has been assessed by multiple studies encompassing different clinical situations (Table 4), ranging from HF to AF.
Inciardi et al. [46], in participants from the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities) study without prevalent HF, showed that LAEF (and other abnormal LA measures but LAVi) was associated with NT-proBNP levels and with incident HF or death. Moreover, Welles et al. [47], integrating LAEF with the left ventricular outflow-tract velocity time integral, as the LAFI (LAEF xLV outflow-tract velocity time integral]/[LAVI]) showed that any decrease in the LAFI was associated with increased adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary arteries disease and preserved EF. In 1951, participants from the 4th Copenhagen City Heart Study, free from atrial fibrillation (AF), functional measures of the LA, including LAEF, were independent predictors of incident AF, particularly in individuals without hypertension [48]. LAEF can also be used to predict postoperative AF, as shown by Darweesh et al. [49], after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Intriguingly, Larsen et al. [50] demonstrated that lower LAEF was associated with the primary endpoint of ischemic stroke, independently of incident AF, in participants from the Copenhagen City Heart Study with no prior history of AF or ischemic stroke. Interestingly, in patients with AF undergoing cardioversion, LAEF, assessed during AF, was significantly larger in the group with sinus rhythm maintenance after 12 months than in the group with AF recurrence [51]. Similarly, higher LAEF was noted in the sinus rhythm compared with the AF recurrence group following ablation at 3 months [52].
Table 4. Studies regarding LA function measured by left atrial ejection fraction (LAEF).
Table 4. Studies regarding LA function measured by left atrial ejection fraction (LAEF).
AuthorPopulationPrincipal Findings
Welles et al.,
2012 [47]		855 patients with CAD and EF > 50%LA dysfunction predicts HF hospitalization
Olsen et al.,
2017 [48]		1951 patients without prior AFLower LAEF (45 ± 15%) in patients who developed AF
Henriksen et al.,
2018 [53]		320 patients hospitalized for AMILAEF reduced in response to elevated LV end-diastolic pressure
Walek et al.,
2020 [51]		146 patients with persistent AF underwent CVELAEF, measured during AF, was superior to predicting SR maintenance after CVE (30.8 ± 8.3 vs. 24.6 ± 10.4%)
Darweesh et al.,
2021 [49]		84 patients hospitalized for CABGLAEF mean of 43% was found in patients developing postoperative AF
Inciardi et al.,
2021 [46]		4901 without prevalent HFLAEF 51.6 ± 11.45% in patients with incident HF or death associated with NT-proBNP levels
Larsen et al.,
2022 [50]		1866 patients without known AF or prior ischemic strokeLAEF decrease was associated with ischemic stroke
(mean value 46.4 ± 14.5%)
Khan et al.,
2023 [52]		83 patients undergoing AF ablationLower LAEF (27.9 ± 9.9% vs. 36.3 ± 10.6%) in patients with AF recurrence after 3 months
Abbreviations: AF, atrial fibrillation; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; CAD, coronary artery disease; CVE, electrical cardioversion; LAEF, left atrial ejection fraction; LV, left ventricle; HF, heart failure; SR, sinus rhythm.

4. Peak Atrial Longitudinal Strain

The most studied STE-derived parameter for atrial function is LA strain, which corresponds to the peak atrial longitudinal deformation during the LA reservoir phase. This parameter is automatically calculated by specific software that is available on workstations or last-generation echocardiographic machines [50], using the LA endocardial traces from the four- and two-chamber apical views. However, LA strain curves can be traced either from the start of the P wave or the start of the QRS complex; the QRS as the reference point for the analysis of LA strain is more commonly used. LA strain (Figure 2 and Figure 3) provides essential information about the mechanical function of the LA [54,55] with some limitations, which have been reviewed by Nagueh et al. [56].
Meel et al. [57] showed that LA reservoir function remains stable over decades. A similar finding was reported by Morris et al. [36] using a 2D STE in healthy controls. Moreover, Yoshida et al. [58] identified a significant interaction between gender and LA function. Their study on 414 subjects with paroxysmal and/or persistent AF revealed lower LA systolic strain values in women. LA strain inversely correlates with the fibrosis extent, particularly in persistent AF. Cameli et al. [59] observed a negative correlation between histological fibrosis and LA strain in patients with severe degenerative mitral regurgitation.
Many studies have shown the usefulness of LA strain in predicting elevated LV filling pressures. According to different authors who studied LVFP invasively, LA strain correlates with LVEDP, PCWP, and pre-A pressure when invasively assessed [60,61,62], though it is better in HFrEF patients [63]. It performs better than the LAVI and other commonly guideline-directed echocardiographic measures [62,63,64]. LA strain is considered helpful to grade LVDD [65] and to accurately discriminate between non-cardiac and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)-related dyspnea [55], with some potential limitations [56].
LA strain demonstrated good prognostic value in predicting CV events or a new onset of AF in various clinical conditions, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease [66,67,68]. LA strain is a predictor of cardiovascular events in patients who have suffered acute myocardial infarction. Firstly, according to Madsen et al. [69], a lower LA strain can detect new-onset AF in the post-acute setting. Similarly, Antoni et al. [70] and Ersbøll et al. [71] showed the prognostic role of lower values of LA strain in patients with acute coronary artery disease. More recently, Pastore et al. [72] showed the role of LA strain in predicting postoperative AF in patients undergoing CABG.
Recently, Benfari et al. [34] examined the determinants of left atrial strain and its clinical features across different heart failure stages using data from the EACVI MASCOT registry. The study revealed that LA strain varies significantly with heart failure progression, from the preclinical to clinical stages, and provides valuable insights into cardiac dysfunction. LA strain has been identified as a predictor of new-onset AF in patients with heart failure, thus indicating that LA strain could be a useful marker for monitoring and managing HF patients [73]. Moreover, Park et al. [74] also demonstrated that LA strain is associated with worse clinical outcomes in acute HF, showing its potential as a predictive marker for mortality and adverse events. Aimo et al. [75] explored the diagnostic value of LA strain in cardiac amyloidosis. Their study concluded that LA strain is significantly reduced in patients with amyloid cardiomyopathy and can aid in early diagnosis, providing a non-invasive method to enhance the detection and management of this condition. Essayagh et al. [76] followed for a mean of 21 months 307 consecutive HCM patients, observing that LA strain was strongly associated with the occurrence of cardiac events.
Patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) are at high risk of atrial remodeling and subsequent dysfunction, even before LV alterations [77]. LA strain, mirroring LA function, can identify VHD patients who are at an increased risk of events. According to Thellier et al. [78], both LA strain and diastolic dysfunction are strong predictors of increased mortality in patients with aortic stenosis. Even in mitral regurgitation, lower LA strain values are associated with worse outcomes, as shown in moderate asymptomatic primary mitral regurgitation by Cameli et al. [79] and also in functional mitral regurgitation by Gomes et al. [80], who linked LA strain with all-cause mortality. LA strain has been extensively used in identifying patients at risk of AF. Firstly, a systematic review by Anagnostopoulos et al. [81] showed that lower LA strain can help detect occult AF in patients with cryptogenic stroke. Furthermore, Pagola et al. [82] investigated the predictive value of LA strain and NT-proBNP for AF with a high risk of embolization, finding that reduced LA strain and elevated NT-proBNP levels are strong predictors of embolic events in AF patients. Studies by Alhakak et al. [83] and Hauser et al. [54] showed that LA strain is a significant predictor of both AF and stroke in the general population. Finally, Takagi et al. [84] suggested that, due to its prognostic role, routine LA strain measurements can help tailor treatment strategies for AF patients and improve their clinical outcomes. These and other [85,86,87,88,89,90] studies among major ones regarding LA strain are summarized in Table 5. What is noteworthy is that based on the lower limit of normal LA strain (23%) [36] (Table 3), Morris et al. [88] demonstrated that in patients with LV diastolic dysfunction, elevated LV filling pressures, and a normal LAVI, abnormal LA strain was related to an increased frequency of dyspnea, New York Heart Association functional class III/IV, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure >15 mm Hg, and heart failure hospitalization at 2 years. Moreover, in the same subgroup, abnormal LA strain was the only independent risk for developing HF after adjusting for sex and age. Similar values of LA strain have been correlated with the incidence of AF by others [55,84]. It should also be underscored, however, that a consensus report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging suggested a lower threshold of LA strain (i.e., 18%) for evaluating LV filling pressure both in HFrEF and HFpEF [35].

5. Tissue Doppler Imaging and LA Function: A Simplified, Complementary Approach

Measurement of myocardial velocities with tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) has become an integrated part of the assessment of diastolic heart function in clinical echocardiography. Moreover, both systolic (TDI-s’) as well as early (e’) and late (a’) diastolic TDI velocities have been demonstrated to be sensitive markers of impaired cardiac function and prognosis [2,7,91,92]. Importantly, it has been shown that different phases of the TDI curve carry different prognostic information [93].
TDI-a’ is a fast and accurate marker of atrial systolic function, as it correlates with other measures of LA function. [94,95,96,97,98]. In the general population, TDI-a’ is normally distributed [99]. Differently from early diastolic velocity (TDI-e’), TDI-a’ directly increases with age progressively, resulting in a temporal alignment of LA contraction and late diastolic flow [100,101] (Figure 4).
Finally, all systolic atrioventricular-plane measures correlate with TDI-e’ but not with TDI-a’ [101,102,103,104,105,106,107]. Consistently, with progressing myocardial deterioration, s′ and e′ will decrease early in the disease progression while TDI-a’ will increase, implying compensation by augmentation of atrial function [108].
The relationship between TDI-a’ and LA function has been extensively demonstrated. Invasive studies have shown that TDI-a’ is directly related to LA contractile function, inversely related to LA afterload (i.e., LV end-diastolic pressure), and is affected by myocardial ischemia [109,110,111,112,113]. Moreover, the relationship between TDI-a’ and other echocardiographic indices of LA function, including STE [113], has been demonstrated in different clinical and hemodynamic settings [95,96,97,113,114,115,116]. Interestingly, the echocardiographic parameter that most accurately represented LAEF, obtained by multi-detector computed tomography in 104 consecutive patients scheduled for paroxysmal (AF) ablation, was TDI-a’ [117]. Importantly, there is evidence of an impaired reserve of LA function parameters, including TDI-a’ in patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) as opposed to hypertensives without HF [100,118,119]. Normal values for TDI-a’ from very large studies are summarized in Table 6 [17,120,121,122,123].

6. TDI-a’ and Outcome

TDI-a’ emerges as a valuable prognostic marker, offering insights into LA function and prognosis across various clinical scenarios [107,119,123,124,125,126,127,128,129]. Yamamoto et al. [123] showed that a TDI-a’ cut-off value of <5 cm/s strongly predicted the clinical outcome in HFrEF compared with the clinical, hemodynamic, and other echocardiographic variables. Mogelvang et al. [126] showed that TDI-assessed systolic and both early and late diastolic function provide prognostic information on CV mortality and morbidity independently of and incrementally to the traditional risk factors and biomarkers. Intriguingly, the expected interdependency between early and late diastolic function (Figure 4) was not found in the group who suffered an event during follow-up, indicating that the otherwise expected compensatory mechanism between TDI-e’ and TDI-a’ is impaired in this subset and maybe, in part, responsible for their poor prognosis. Even in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, Biering-Sorensen et al. [107] could demonstrate that TDI-a’ predicted future arrhythmic and CV mortality outcomes. In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, Iwahashi et al. [128] showed that TDI-a’, at 24 h, predicted major adverse CV events. Oike et al. [118] demonstrated that HFpEF patients with a TDI-a’ of <7.45 cm/s had a significantly higher risk of total CV- and HF-related events than those with a TDI-a’ of ≥7.45 cm/s.

7. TDI-a’ Integrated Echocardiographic Indices

The TDI-a’ velocity has been integrated with other echocardiographic indices. The total atrial conduction time (PA-TDI), defined as the time from the onset of the P wave on an ECG to the peak of TDI-a’ tracing, is a useful marker of atrial remodeling to identify patients at risk for AF, as well as to guide AF management, as extensively reviewed by Müller and colleagues [130]. Moreover, with the progressive development of HF with elevated LV end-diastolic pressure, atrial afterload results in decreased LA contraction—an effect that can be detected by prolonged PA-TDI [131].
Preclinical atrial dysfunction is characterized by reduced reservoir and conduit function, while atrial contractile function remains normal. As further deterioration of LV compliance occurs, TDI-a’ reduces, and the LAVI progressively increases [132]. This has resulted in considering LAVI/a’ a likely candidate for detecting raised LV end-diastolic pressure (Figure 5).
In 395 patients hospitalized with dyspnea, Park et al. [133] demonstrated that a LAVI/a’ of 4.0 was the best cut-off value to identify advanced DD and was an independent predictor of clinical outcomes. Consistently, Stahrenberg et al. [129] showed that a LAVI/a′ of < 2.3 could effectively rule out paroxysmal AF on 7-day Holter monitoring in 193 consecutive patients with cerebral ischemia and sinus rhythm on presentation. Moreover, the LAVI/a’ enabled a more accurate diagnosis of a history of paroxysmal AF than the conventional parameters in hypertensive patients [134], and LAVI/a′ was related to plasma BNP levels in patients with acute coronary syndrome—being useful for predicting cardiac events in these patients [135].
Jcdd 11 00241 g005
Figure 5. Measurements of left atrial volume index (LAVI) over TDI-a’. LAVI over TDI-a’, renamed LA volumetric/mechanical coupling index (LACI) by Benfari et al. [136], has been shown to mirror the severity of diastolic dysfunction and to correlate with outcomes in different settings. The left panel shows a 58-year-old woman with uncomplicated hypertension, with mildly enlarged LAVI (40 mL/m2) and TDI-a’ = 9 cm/s, resulting in LACI = 4.4. The right panel reports a 78-year-old woman with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction due to transthyretin amyloidosis, with severely enlarged LAVI (60 mL/m2) and a TDI-a’ = 4 cm/s, reduced in comparison with what is expected for age, resulting in a LACI = 15.
Figure 5. Measurements of left atrial volume index (LAVI) over TDI-a’. LAVI over TDI-a’, renamed LA volumetric/mechanical coupling index (LACI) by Benfari et al. [136], has been shown to mirror the severity of diastolic dysfunction and to correlate with outcomes in different settings. The left panel shows a 58-year-old woman with uncomplicated hypertension, with mildly enlarged LAVI (40 mL/m2) and TDI-a’ = 9 cm/s, resulting in LACI = 4.4. The right panel reports a 78-year-old woman with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction due to transthyretin amyloidosis, with severely enlarged LAVI (60 mL/m2) and a TDI-a’ = 4 cm/s, reduced in comparison with what is expected for age, resulting in a LACI = 15.
Jcdd 11 00241 g005
Interestingly, Setti et al. [13], in 1158 individuals without HF, including 273 healthy individuals, showed that LAVI/a’ mirrored grades of DD and was the single most powerful tool to disentangle the undetermined diastolic function. In particular, by a stepwise regression model, LAVI/a’ was more significantly related to DD grades than a’ alone. Benfari et al. [136], in 4196 patients with HFrEF, showed that LAVI/a’, [renamed the LA volumetric/mechanical coupling index (LACI)], was strongly, independently, and incrementally associated with excess mortality, irrespective of the functional mitral regurgitation grade and in all subsets. Similarly, Essayagh et al. [137], in 4792 patients with floppy mitral valves, reported that the LACI was both associated with worse clinical presentations and incrementally determinant of the outcome. Benfari et al. [138] also demonstrated that the LACI predicted new-onset AF independently from the CHARGE-AF or CHA2DS2-VASc score in the Copenhagen City Heart Study. Finally, Madsen et al. [68] demonstrated that echocardiographic measures of LA function, including LAVI/a’, are independent predictors of AF following acute coronary syndrome, suggesting that evaluation of LA function might improve the prognostic workup, aid in risk stratification for AF, and improve selection for further examinations.
The importance of the LA contribution to cardiac function has become increasingly recognized in clinical practice. The assessment of LA volume by transthoracic echocardiography is an indispensable component of any echocardiographic examination. Dedicated views, appropriate methods, and accurate tracings are all necessary technical skills to obtain an optimal LA volumetric assessment, whose interpretation, however, must consider the multiplicity of factors affecting the LAVI [5,14,16,17]. However, it has become progressively clearer that a morphological evaluation should be integrated with a proper assessment of LA function [7,18]. Historically, Doppler echocardiography, particularly the PVF signal, is utilized to understand LA pressure and function [21]. Regrettably, PVF is relatively underused compared with the transmitral flow to evaluate LA function, though the waveform of PVF enables an assessment of the LA pump, reservoir, and conduit functions [24,134]. Echocardiographic volumetric techniques for assessing LA function have been proposed, with important clinical results achieved [47,48,49,50,51,52], but multiple factors raise concerns about time expenditure and its feasibility in clinical practice. STE represents an undoubted improvement in the assessment of LA function [55,63,72,73,74,75,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90]. However, using LA function based on STE to predict LV filling pressure [21,56] must take into consideration the presence of either a normal/abnormal LVEF as well as the presence of AF. Even more importantly, in terms of clinical applicability, STE relies on the quality of 2D images and claims dedicated software that only recently became available on echocardiographic machines, thus often needing external workstations. Moreover, issues related to potential vendor dependence raise questions about the usability of the cut-off values obtained by specific software packages [35]. Finally, STE is not available in most non-referral settings, thus limiting its wide implementation in clinical practice.
TDI is a largely available echocardiographic technique and offers a unique possibility for implementing LA function in everyday clinical practice [87,135]. TDI-a’ is correlated with both invasive and non-invasive estimates of LA function [94,95,96,97,98], and its clinical and prognostic significance has been shown in multiple clinical scenarios (Table 7). Interestingly, TDI-a’ has been integrated with other parameters, namely PA-TDI [130,131] and LAVI/a’ (Table 7), with potential interesting clinical and prognostic implications. TDI-a’ thus emerges as a valuable tool in providing a complementary but simple assessment of LA function, which is feasible in a busy clinical setting without the need for post-processing analysis. Of course, TDI-a’ is negatively affected by the insonation angle and unreliability in patients with extensive mitral annular calcification, as is any other TDI measure [139,140,141]. Moreover, the implication of the site of measurement (i.e., septal, lateral, or average) or the influence of major intraventricular conduction disturbances on measurements and interpretation must also be assessed.
Unfortunately, TDI-a’ is often disregarded. This is likely attributable to the fact that the current guidelines support the exclusive utilization of TDI-e’ and E/e’ in the context of the assessment of diastolic function. Moreover, it is not habitually mentioned in the vast majority of research studies devoted to refined, newer technologies such as STE. Furthermore, the determinants of TDI-a’ and other derived indexes, such as LAVI/a’, and their potential in tracking therapeutical interventions in specific clinical settings must be explored. Most importantly, studies comparing a TDI-a’-based evaluation of LA function with well-established STE-based technologies are necessary to ascertain its full significance.

8. Conclusions

The current medical evidence underscores the clinical relevance of adding an assessment of LA function to the LAVI to enhance the clinical and prognostic information in the management of CV diseases. Among the methods used to assess LA function by echocardiography, LA strain emerges as the key parameter, supported by the most extensive medical evidence. Additionally, LAEF, using 2D and 3D echocardiography and, to a lesser extent, mitral annular a’ using TDI, are also valuable parameters that provide clinical and prognostic information. Thus, incorporating these parameters, particularly LA strain, into standard LA measurements such as the LAVI in clinical practice provides clinical and prognostic information for better patient management, especially in those with CV risk factors and preserved LVEF.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.N. and D.M.; methodology, S.N.; writing—Original draft preparation, M.M. and E.D.; writing—Review and editing, S.N., D.M., A.C. and R.B.; visualization, S.N. and R.B.; supervision, S.N. and D.M.; project administration, S.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Douglas, P.S. The left atrium: A biomarker of chronic diastolic dysfunction and cardiovascular disease risk. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2003, 42, 1206–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Tsang, T.S.; Barnes, M.E.; Gersh, B.J.; Takemoto, Y.; Rosales, A.G.; Bailey, K.R.; Seward, J.B. Prediction of risk for first age-related cardiovascular events in an elderly population: The incremental value of echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2003, 42, 1199–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Abhayaratna, W.P.; Seward, J.B.; Appleton, C.P.; Douglas, P.S.; Oh, J.K.; Tajik, A.J.; Tsang, T.S. Left atrial size: Physiologic determinants and clinical applications. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006, 47, 2357–2363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Hoit, B.D. Left atrial size and function: Role in prognosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2014, 63, 493–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Lang, R.M.; Badano, L.P.; Mor-Avi, V.; Afilalo, J.; Armstrong, A.; Ernande, L.; Flachskampf, F.A.; Foster, E.; Goldstein, S.A.; Kuznetsova, T.; et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: An update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2015, 28, 1-39.e14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Pieske, B.; Tschöpe, C.; de Boer, R.A.; Fraser, A.G.; Anker, S.D.; Donal, E.; Edelmann, F.; Fu, M.; Guazzi, M.; Lam, C.S.P.; et al. How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: The HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm: A consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur. Heart J. 2019, 40, 3297–3317, Erratum in Eur. Heart J. 2021, 42, 1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Thomas, L.; Muraru, D.; Popescu, B.A.; Sitges, M.; Rosca, M.; Pedrizzetti, G.; Henein, M.Y.; Donal, E.; Badano, L.P. Evaluation of Left Atrial Size and Function: Relevance for Clinical Practice. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2020, 33, 934–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Blume, G.G.; Mcleod, C.J.; Barnes, M.E.; Seward, J.B.; Pellikka, P.A.; Bastiansen, P.M.; Tsang, T.S. Left atrial function: Physiology, assessment, and clinical implications. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2011, 12, 421–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Hoit, B.D. Assessment of Left Atrial Function by Echocardiography: Novel Insights. Curr. Cardiol. Rep. 2018, 20, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Lindström, L.; Wranne, B. Pulsed tissue Doppler evaluation of mitral annulus motion: A new window to assessment of diastolic function. Clin. Physiol. 1999, 19, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hesse, B.; Schuele, S.U.; Thamilasaran, M.; Thomas, J.; Rodriguez, L. A rapid method to quantify left atrial contractile function: Doppler tissue imaging of the mitral annulus during atrial systole. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2004, 5, 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Brinker, S.K.; Pandey, A.; Ayers, C.R.; Barlow, C.E.; DeFina, L.F.; Willis, B.L.; Radford, N.B.; Farzaneh-Far, R.; de Lemos, J.A.; Drazner, M.H.; et al. Association of cardiorespiratory fitness with left ventricular remodeling and diastolic function: The Cooper Center Longitudinal Study. JACC Heart Fail. 2014, 2, 238–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Setti, M.; Benfari, G.; Mele, D.; Rossi, A.; Ballo, P.; Galderisi, M.; Henein, M.; Nistri, S. Discrepancies in Assessing Diastolic Function in Pre-Clinical Heart Failure Using Different Algorithms-A Primary Care Study. Diagnostics 2020, 10, 850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  14. Nistri, S.; Galderisi, M.; Ballo, P.; Olivotto, I.; D’Andrea, A.; Pagliani, L.; Santoro, A.; Papesso, B.; Innelli, P.; Cecchi, F.; et al. Determinants of echocardiographic left atrial volume: Implications for normalcy. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2011, 12, 826–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Singh, A.; Carvalho Singulane, C.; Miyoshi, T.; Prado, A.D.; Addetia, K.; Bellino, M.; Daimon, M.; Gutierrez Fajardo, P.; Kasliwal, R.R.; Kirkpatrick, J.N.; et al. Normal Values of Left Atrial Size and Function and the Impact of Age: Results of the World Alliance Societies of Echocardiography Study. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2022, 35, 154–164.e3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Eriksen-Volnes, T.; Grue, J.F.; Hellum Olaisen, S.; Letnes, J.M.; Nes, B.; Løvstakken, L.; Wisløff, U.; Dalen, H. Normalized Echocardiographic Values from Guideline-Directed Dedicated Views for Cardiac Dimensions and Left Ventricular Function. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2023, 16, 1501–1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Ballo, P.; Nistri, S.; Galderisi, M.; Mele, D.; Rossi, A.; Dini, F.L.; Olivotto, I.; Losi, M.A.; D’Andrea, A.; Zuppiroli, A.; et al. Determinants of discrepancies between two-dimensional echocardiographic methods for assessment of maximal left atrial volume. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2017, 18, 584–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Nagueh, S.F.; Smiseth, O.A.; Appleton, C.P.; Byrd, B.F., 3rd; Dokainish, H.; Edvardsen, T.; Flachskampf, F.A.; Gillebert, T.C.; Klein, A.L.; Lancellotti, P.; et al. Recommendations for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function by Echocardiography: An Update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2016, 29, 277–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Thomas, L.; Marwick, T.H.; Popescu, B.A.; Donal, E.; Badano, L.P. Left Atrial Structure and Function, and Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2019, 73, 1961–1977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Boyd, A.C.; Richards, D.A.; Marwick, T.; Thomas, L. Atrial strain rate is a sensitive measure of alterations in atrial phasic function in healthy ageing. Heart 2011, 97, 1513–1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Inoue, K.; Kawakami, H.; Akazawa, Y.; Higashi, H.; Higaki, T.; Yamaguchi, O. Echocardiographic Assessment of Atrial Function: From Basic Mechanics to Specific Cardiac Diseases. J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2022, 9, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  22. Thomas, L.; Hoy, M.; Byth, K.; Schiller, N.B. The left atrial function index: A rhythm independent marker of atrial function. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2008, 9, 356–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Leung, D.Y.; Boyd, A.; Ng, A.A.; Chi, C.; Thomas, L. Echocardiographic evaluation of left atrial size and function: Current understanding, pathophysiologic correlates, and prognostic implications. Am. Heart J. 2008, 156, 1056–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Fadel, B.M.; Pibarot, P.; Kazzi, B.E.; Al-Admawi, M.; Galzerano, D.; Alhumaid, M.; Alamro, B.; Mahjoub, H.; Echahidi, N.; Mohty, D. Spectral Doppler Interrogation of the Pulmonary Veins for the Diagnosis of Cardiac Disorders: A Comprehensive Review. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2021, 34, 223–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Manning, W.J.; Silverman, D.I.; Katz, S.E.; Douglas, P.S. Atrial ejection force: A noninvasive assessment of atrial systolic function. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1993, 22, 221–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Triposkiadis, F.; Harbas, C.; Sitafidis, G.; Skoularigis, J.; Demopoulos, V.; Kelepeshis, G. Echocardiographic assessment of left atrial ejection force and kinetic energy in chronic heart failure. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2008, 24, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Vasan, R.S.; Larson, M.G.; Levy, D.; Galderisi, M.; Wolf, P.A.; Benjamin, E.J. Doppler transmitral flow indexes and risk of atrial fibrillation (the Framingham Heart Study). Am. J. Cardiol. 2003, 91, 1079–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Choong, C.Y.; Herrmann, H.C.; Weyman, A.E.; Fifer, M.A. Preload dependence of Doppler-derived indexes of left ventricular diastolic function in humans. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1987, 10, 800–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Miyatake, K.; Okamoto, M.; Kinoshita, N.; Owa, M.; Nakasone, I.; Sakakibara, H.; Nimura, Y. Augmentation of atrial contribution to left ventricular inflow with aging as assessed by intracardiac Doppler flowmetry. Am. J. Cardiol. 1984, 53, 586–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Marwick, T.H. Measurement of strain and strain rate by echocardiography: Ready for prime time? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006, 47, 1313–1327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Gorcsan, J., 3rd; Tanaka, H. Echocardiographic assessment of myocardial strain. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2011, 58, 1401–1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Sirbu, C.; Herbots, L.; D’hooge, J.; Claus, P.; Marciniak, A.; Langeland, T.; Bijnens, B.; Rademakers, F.E.; Sutherland, G.R. Feasibility of strain and strain rate imaging for the assessment of regional left atrial deformation: A study in normal subjects. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2006, 7, 199–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Mondillo, S.; Galderisi, M.; Mele, D.; Cameli, M.; Lomoriello, V.S.; Zacà, V.; Ballo, P.; D’Andrea, A.; Muraru, D.; Losi, M.; et al. Speckle-tracking echocardiography: A new technique for assessing myocardial function. J. Ultrasound Med. 2011, 30, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Benfari, G.; Mandoli, G.E.; Magne, J.; Miglioranza, M.H.; Ancona, R.; Luksic, V.R.; Pastore, M.C.; Santoro, C.; Michalski, B.; Malagoli, A.; et al. Left atrial strain determinants and clinical features according to the heart failure stages. New insight from EACVI MASCOT registry. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2022, 38, 2635–2644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  35. Smiseth, O.A.; Morris, D.A.; Cardim, N.; Cikes, M.; Delgado, V.; Donal, E.; Flachskampf, F.A.; Galderisi, M.; Gerber, B.L.; Gimelli, A.; et al. Reviewers: This document was reviewed by members of the 2018–2020 EACVI Scientific Documents Committee. Multimodality imaging in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: An expert consensus document of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2022, 23, e34–e61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Morris, D.A.; Takeuchi, M.; Krisper, M.; Köhncke, C.; Bekfani, T.; Carstensen, T.; Hassfeld, S.; Dorenkamp, M.; Otani, K.; Takigiku, K.; et al. Normal values and clinical relevance of left atrial myocardial function analysed by speckle-tracking echocardiography: Multicentre study. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2015, 16, 364–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Pathan, F.; D’Elia, N.; Nolan, M.T.; Marwick, T.H.; Negishi, K. Normal Ranges of Left Atrial Strain by Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2017, 30, 59–70.e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Sugimoto, T.; Robinet, S.; Dulgheru, R.; Bernard, A.; Ilardi, F.; Contu, L.; Addetia, K.; Caballero, L.; Kacharava, G.; Athanassopoulos, G.D.; et al. Echocardiographic reference ranges for normal left atrial function parameters: Results from the EACVI NORRE study. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2018, 19, 630–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Takeuchi, M.; Kitano, T.; Nabeshima, Y.; Otsuji, Y.; Otani, K. Left ventricular and left atrial volume ratio assessed by three-dimensional echocardiography: Novel indices for evaluating age-related change in left heart chamber size. Physiol. Rep. 2019, 7, e14300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  40. Sun, B.J.; Park, J.H.; Lee, M.; Choi, J.O.; Lee, J.H.; Shin, M.S.; Kim, M.J.; Jung, H.O.; Park, J.R.; Sohn, I.S.; et al. Normal Reference Values for Left Atrial Strain and Its Determinants from a Large Korean Multicenter Registry. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 28, 186–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  41. Nielsen, A.B.; Skaarup, K.G.; Hauser, R.; Johansen, N.D.; Lassen, M.C.H.; Jensen, G.B.; Schnohr, P.; Møgelvang, R.; Biering-Sørensen, T. Normal values and reference ranges for left atrial strain by speckle-tracking echocardiography: The Copenhagen City Heart Study. Eur. Heart, J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 23, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yao, G.; Tang, H.; Chen, L.; Yin, L.; Zhu, T.; Yuan, J.; Han, W.; Yang, J.; et al. Echocardiographic Measurements in Normal Chinese Adults (EMINCA) II focusing on left ventricular and left atrial size and function by three-dimensional echocardiography. Front Med. 2024; epub ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Yafasov, M.; Olsen, F.J.; Skaarup, K.G.; Lassen, M.C.H.; Johansen, N.D.; Lindgren, F.L.; Jensen, G.B.; Schnohr, P.; Møgelvang, R.; Søgaard, P.; et al. Normal values for left atrial strain, volume, and function derived from 3D echocardiography: The Copenhagen City Heart Study. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2024, 25, 602–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Almeida, J.; Paiva, P.; Ribeiro, N.; Ferreira, M.; António, N.; Martins, R.; Gonçalves, L. Left atrial ejection fraction is an indicator of left ventricular diastolic function. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2022, 38, 33–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Anthony, C.M.; Wang, T.K.M.; Salam, D.; Obuchowski, N.; Turkmani, M.; Al-Deiri, D.; Popovic, Z.; Griffin, B.; Flamm, S.; Chen, D.; et al. Impact of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Left Atrial Ejection Fraction in Advanced Ischemic Cardiomyopathy. JACC Adv. 2024, 3, 100796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  46. Inciardi, R.M.; Claggett, B.; Minamisawa, M.; Shin, S.H.; Selvaraj, S.; Gonçalves, A.; Wang, W.; Kitzman, D.; Matsushita, K.; Prasad, N.G.; et al. Association of Left Atrial Structure and Function with Heart Failure in Older Adults. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2022, 79, 1549–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Welles, C.C.; Ku, I.A.; Kwan, D.M.; Whooley, M.A.; Schiller, N.B.; Turakhia, M.P. Left atrial function predicts heart failure hospitalization in subjects with preserved ejection fraction and coronary heart disease: Longitudinal data from the Heart and Soul Study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2012, 59, 673–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  48. Olsen, F.J.; Møgelvang, R.; Jensen, G.B.; Jensen, J.S.; Biering-Sørensen, T. Relationship Between Left Atrial Functional Measures and Incident Atrial Fibrillation in the General Population: The Copenhagen City Heart Study. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2019, 12, 981–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Darweesh, R.M.; Baghdady, Y.K.; El Hossary, H.; Khaled, M. Importance of left atrial mechanical function as a predictor of atrial fibrillation risk following cardiac surgery. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 37, 1863–1872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Larsen, B.S.; Olsen, F.J.; Andersen, D.M.; Madsen, C.V.; Møgelvang, R.; Jensen, G.B.; Schnohr, P.; Aplin, M.; Høst, N.B.; Christensen, H.; et al. Left Atrial Volumes and Function, and Long-Term Incidence of Ischemic Stroke in the General Population. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2022, 11, e027031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  51. Wałek, P.; Gorczyca, I.; Sielski, J.; Wożakowska-Kapłon, B. Left atrial emptying fraction determined during atrial fibrillation predicts maintenance of sinus rhythm after direct current cardioversion in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0238002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  52. Khan, H.R.; Yakupoglu, H.Y.; Kralj-Hans, I.; Haldar, S.; Bahrami, T.; Clague, J.; De Souza, A.; Hussain, W.; Jarman, J.; Jones, D.G.; et al. Left Atrial Function Predicts Atrial Arrhythmia Recurrence Following Ablation of Long-Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2023, 16, e015352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  53. Henriksen, E.; Selmeryd, J.; Hedberg, P. Associations of left atrial volumes and Doppler filling indices with left atrial function in acute myocardial infarction. Clin. Physiol. Funct. Imaging 2019, 39, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  54. Hauser, R.; Nielsen, A.B.; Skaarup, K.G.; Lassen, M.C.H.; Duus, L.S.; Johansen, N.D.; Sengeløv, M.; Marott, J.L.; Jensen, G.; Schnohr, P.; et al. Left atrial strain predicts incident atrial fibrillation in the general population: The Copenhagen City Heart Study. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 23, 52–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Reddy, Y.N.V.; Obokata, M.; Egbe, A.; Yang, J.H.; Pislaru, S.; Lin, G.; Carter, R.; Borlaug, B.A. Left atrial strain and compliance in the diagnostic evaluation of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Eur. J. Heart Fail. 2019, 21, 891–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Nagueh, S.F.; Khan, S.U. Left Atrial Strain for Assessment of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function: Focus on Populations with Normal LVEF. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2023, 16, 691–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Meel, R.; Khandheria, B.K.; Peters, F.; Libhaber, E.; Nel, S.; Essop, M.R. Effects of age on left atrial volume and strain parameters using echocardiography in a normal black population. Echo Res. Pract. 2016, 3, 115–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Yoshida, K.; Obokata, M.; Kurosawa, K.; Sorimachi, H.; Kurabayashi, M.; Negishi, K. Effect of Sex Differences on the Association Between Stroke Risk and Left Atrial Anatomy or Mechanics in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2016, 9, e004999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Cameli, M.; Lisi, M.; Righini, F.M.; Massoni, A.; Natali, B.M.; Focardi, M.; Tacchini, D.; Geyer, A.; Curci, V.; Di Tommaso, C.; et al. Usefulness of atrial deformation analysis to predict left atrial fibrosis and endocardial thickness in patients undergoing mitral valve operations for severe mitral regurgitation secondary to mitral valve prolapse. Am. J. Cardiol. 2013, 111, 595–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Cameli, M.; Lisi, M.; Mondillo, S.; Padeletti, M.; Ballo, P.; Tsioulpas, C.; Bernazzali, S.; Maccherini, M. Left atrial longitudinal strain by speckle tracking echocardiography correlates well with left ventricular filling pressures in patients with heart failure. Cardiovasc. Ultrasound 2010, 8, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  61. Cameli, M.; Sparla, S.; Losito, M.; Righini, F.M.; Menci, D.; Lisi, M.; D’Ascenzi, F.; Focardi, M.; Favilli, R.; Pierli, C.; et al. Correlation of Left Atrial Strain and Doppler Measurements with Invasive Measurement of Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Pressure in Patients Stratified for Different Values of Ejection Fraction. Echocardiography 2016, 33, 398–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Singh, A.; Medvedofsky, D.; Mediratta, A.; Balaney, B.; Kruse, E.; Ciszek, B.; Shah, A.P.; Blair, J.E.; Maffessanti, F.; Addetia, K.; et al. Peak left atrial strain as a single measure for the non-invasive assessment of left ventricular filling pressures. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2019, 35, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  63. Inoue, K.; Khan, F.H.; Remme, E.W.; Ohte, N.; García-Izquierdo, E.; Chetrit, M.; Moñivas-Palomero, V.; Mingo-Santos, S.; Andersen, Ø.S.; Gude, E.; et al. Determinants of left atrial reservoir and pump strain and use of atrial strain for evaluation of left ventricular filling pressure. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 23, 61–70, Erratum in: Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 23, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Lundberg, A.; Johnson, J.; Hage, C.; Bäck, M.; Merkely, B.; Venkateshvaran, A.; Lund, L.H.; Nagy, A.I.; Manouras, A. Left atrial strain improves estimation of filling pressures in heart failure: A simultaneous echocardiographic and invasive haemodynamic study. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2019, 108, 703–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  65. Singh, A.; Addetia, K.; Maffessanti, F.; Mor-Avi, V.; Lang, R.M. LA Strain for Categorization of LV Diastolic Dysfunction. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2017, 10, 735–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  66. Mondillo, S.; Cameli, M.; Caputo, M.L.; Lisi, M.; Palmerini, E.; Padeletti, M.; Ballo, P. Early detection of left atrial strain abnormalities by speckle-tracking in hypertensive and diabetic patients with normal left atrial size. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2011, 24, 898–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Kadappu, K.K.; Boyd, A.; Eshoo, S.; Haluska, B.; Yeo, A.E.; Marwick, T.H.; Thomas, L. Changes in left atrial volume in diabetes mellitus: More than diastolic dysfunction? Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2012, 13, 1016–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Kadappu, K.K.; Abhayaratna, K.; Boyd, A.; French, J.K.; Xuan, W.; Abhayaratna, W.; Thomas, L. Independent Echocardiographic Markers of Cardiovascular Involvement in Chronic Kidney Disease: The Value of Left Atrial Function and Volume. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2016, 29, 359–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Madsen, A.R.; Skaarup, K.G.; Iversen, A.Z.; Jørgensen, P.G.; Pedersson, P.R.; Biering-Sørensen, T. Echocardiographic Measures of Left Atrial Structure and Function and the Association with Atrial Fibrillation following Acute Coronary Syndrome. Cardiology 2023, 148, 207–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Antoni, M.L.; ten Brinke, E.A.; Atary, J.Z.; Marsan, N.A.; Holman, E.R.; Schalij, M.J.; Bax, J.J.; Delgado, V. Left atrial strain is related to adverse events in patients after acute myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart 2011, 97, 1332–1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ersbøll, M.; Andersen, M.J.; Valeur, N.; Mogensen, U.M.; Waziri, H.; Møller, J.E.; Hassager, C.; Søgaard, P.; Køber, L. The prognostic value of left atrial peak reservoir strain in acute myocardial infarction is dependent on left ventricular longitudinal function and left atrial size. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2013, 6, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Pastore, M.C.; Degiovanni, A.; Grisafi, L.; Renda, G.; Sozzani, M.; Giordano, A.; Salvatici, C.; Lorenz, V.; Pierfelice, F.; Cappelli, C.; et al. Left Atrial Strain to Predict Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2024, 17, e015969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Park, J.J.; Park, J.H.; Hwang, I.C.; Park, J.B.; Cho, G.Y.; Marwick, T.H. Left Atrial Strain as a Predictor of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Heart Failure. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 13, 2071–2081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Park, J.H.; Hwang, I.C.; Park, J.J.; Park, J.B.; Cho, G.Y. Prognostic power of left atrial strain in patients with acute heart failure. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 22, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Aimo, A.; Fabiani, I.; Giannoni, A.; Mandoli, G.E.; Pastore, M.C.; Vergaro, G.; Spini, V.; Chubuchny, V.; Pasanisi, E.M.; Petersen, C.; et al. Multi-chamber speckle tracking imaging and diagnostic value of left atrial strain in cardiac amyloidosis. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2022, 24, 130–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Essayagh, B.; Resseguier, N.; Michel, N.; Casalta, A.C.; Renard, S.; Donghi, V.; Carbone, A.; Piazzai, C.; Ambrosi, P.; Levy, F.; et al. Left atrial dysfunction as marker of poor outcome in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Arch. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2021, 114, 96–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Molnár, A.Á.; Sánta, A.; Pásztor, D.T.; Merkely, B. Atrial Cardiomyopathy in Valvular Heart Disease: From Molecular Biology to Clinical Perspectives. Cells 2023, 12, 1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  78. Thellier, N.; Altes, A.; Layec, J.; Castel, A.L.; Delelis, F.; Hubert, T.; Outerryck, F.; Appert, L.; Tribouilloy, C.; Maréchaux, S. Impact of left atrial and diastolic ventricular dysfunction on mortality in patients with aortic stenosis. Arch. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2023, 116, 126–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Cameli, M.; Lisi, M.; Giacomin, E.; Caputo, M.; Navarri, R.; Malandrino, A.; Ballo, P.; Agricola, E.; Mondillo, S. Chronic mitral regurgitation: Left atrial deformation analysis by two dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography. Echocardiography 2011, 28, 327–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Gomes, D.A.; Lopes, P.M.; Freitas, P.; Albuquerque, F.; Reis, C.; Guerreiro, S.; Abecasis, J.; Trabulo, M.; Ferreira, A.M.; Ferreira, J.; et al. Peak left atrial longitudinal strain is associated with all-cause mortality in patients with ventricular functional mitral regurgitation. Cardiovasc. Ultrasound 2023, 6, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  81. Anagnostopoulos, I.; Kousta, M.; Kossyvakis, C.; Paraskevaidis, N.T.; Schizas, N.; Vrachatis, D.; Deftereos, S.; Giannopoulos, G. Atrial strain and occult atrial fibrillation in cryptogenic stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2023, 112, 1600–1609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Pagola, J.; Juega, J.; Francisco-Pascual, J.; Bustamante, A.; Penalba, A.; Pala, E.; Rodriguez, M.; De Lera-Alfonso, M.; Arenillas, J.F.; Cabezas, J.A.; et al. Crypto-AF study group. Predicting Atrial Fibrillation with High Risk of Embolization with Atrial Strain and NT-proBNP. Transl. Stroke Res. 2021, 12, 735–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Alhakak, A.S.; Biering-Sørensen, S.R.; Møgelvang, R.; Modin, D.; Jensen, G.B.; Schnohr, P.; Iversen, A.Z.; Svendsen, J.H.; Jespersen, T.; Gislason, G.; et al. Usefulness of left atrial strain for predicting incident atrial fibrillation and ischaemic stroke in the general population. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2022, 23, 363–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Takagi, T.; Hosomi, T. Peak atrial longitudinal strain represents atrial fibrillation burden in daily practice: Clinical implication of routine left atrial strain measurements. J. Echocardiogr. 2023, 21, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Cameli, M.; Lisi, M.; Focardi, M.; Reccia, R.; Natali, B.M.; Sparla, S.; Mondillo, S. Left atrial deformation analysis by speckle tracking echocardiography for prediction of cardiovascular outcomes. Am. J. Cardiol. 2012, 110, 264–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Freed, B.H.; Daruwalla, V.; Cheng, J.Y.; Aguilar, F.G.; Beussink, L.; Choi, A.; Klein, D.A.; Dixon, D.; Baldridge, A.; Rasmussen-Torvik, L.J.; et al. Prognostic Utility and Clinical Significance of Cardiac Mechanics in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: Importance of Left Atrial Strain. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2016, 9, 003754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  87. Santos, A.B.; Roca, G.Q.; Claggett, B.; Sweitzer, N.K.; Shah, S.J.; Anand, I.S.; Fang, J.C.; Zile, M.R.; Pitt, B.; Solomon, S.D.; et al. Prognostic Relevance of Left Atrial Dysfunction in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction. Circ. Heart Fail. 2016, 9, e002763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  88. Morris, D.A.; Belyavskiy, E.; Aravind-Kumar, R.; Kropf, M.; Frydas, A.; Braunauer, K.; Marquez, E.; Krisper, M.; Lindhorst, R.; Osmanoglou, E.; et al. Potential Usefulness and Clinical Relevance of Adding Left Atrial Strain to Left Atrial Volume Index in the Detection of Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2018, 11, 1405–1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Cameli, M.; Pastore, M.C.; Righini, F.M.; Mandoli, G.E.; D’Ascenzi, F.; Lisi, M.; Nistor, D.; Sparla, S.; Curci, V.; Di Tommaso, C.; et al. Prognostic value of left atrial strain in patients with moderate asymptomatic mitral regurgitation. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2019, 35, 1597–1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Nielsen, A.B.; Skaarup, K.G.; Lassen, M.C.H.; Djernæs, K.; Hansen, M.L.; Svendsen, J.H.; Johannessen, A.; Hansen, J.; Sørensen, S.K.; Gislason, G.; et al. Usefulness of left atrial speckle tracking echocardiography in predicting recurrence of atrial fibrillation after radiofrequency ablation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 36, 1293–1309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Nistri, S.; Mazzone, C.; Cioffi, G.; Barbati, G.; Gentile, P.; Ballo, P.; Borca, E.C.; Faganello, G.; Cherubini, A.; Bussani, R.; et al. Tissue Doppler indices of diastolic function as prognosticator in patients without heart failure in primary care. J. Cardiol. 2020, 76, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Wang, J.N.; Olsen, N.T.; Taraldsen, I.A.; Mogelvang, R. Whole-cycle analysis of echocardiographic tissue Doppler velocities as a marker of biological age. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2023, 9, 1040647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Dokainish, H.; Sengupta, R.; Pillai, M.; Bobek, J.; Lakkis, N. Correlation of tissue Doppler and two-dimensional speckle myocardial velocities and comparison of derived ratios with invasively measured left ventricular filling pressures. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2009, 22, 284–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Donal, E.; Raud-Raynier, P.; De Place, C.; Gervais, R.; Rosier, A.; Roulaud, M.; Ingels, A.; Carre, F.; Daubert, J.C.; Denjean, A. Resting echocardiographic assessments of left atrial function and filling pressure interest in the understanding of exercise capacity in patients with chronic congestive heart failure. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2008, 21, 703–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Bruch, C.; Stypmann, J.; Gradaus, R.; Breithardt, G.; Wichter, T. Stroke volume and mitral annular velocities. Insights from tissue Doppler imaging. Z. Kardiol. 2004, 93, 799–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Khankirawatana, B.; Khankirawatana, S.; Peterson, B.; Mahrous, H.; Porter, T.R. Peak atrial systolic mitral annular velocity by Doppler tissue reliably predicts left atrial systolic function. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2004, 17, 353–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Gulel, O.; Yuksel, S.; Soylu, K.; Kaplan, O.; Yilmaz, O.; Kahraman, H.; Sahin, M. Evaluation of left atrial functions by color tissue Doppler imaging in adults with body mass indexes >or = 30 kg/m2 versus those < 30 kg/m2. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2009, 25, 371–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Dalen, H.; Thorstensen, A.; Vatten, L.J.; Aase, S.A.; Stoylen, A. Reference values and distribution of conventional echocardiographic Doppler measures and longitudinal tissue Doppler velocities in a population free from cardiovascular disease. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2010, 3, 614–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Bukachi, F.; Waldenström, A.; Mörner, S.; Lindqvist, P.; Henein, M.Y.; Kazzam, E. Age dependency in the timing of mitral annular motion in relation to ventricular filling in healthy subjects: Umea General Population Heart Study. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2008, 9, 522–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Lassen, M.C.H.; Lind, J.N.; Sengeløv, M.; Skaarup, K.G.; Johansen, N.D.; Qasim, A.N.; Jensen, M.T.; Jensen, G.B.; Schnohr, P.; Møgelvang, R.; et al. Changes in Myocardial Tissue Velocities over a Decade: The Copenhagen City Heart Study. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2023, 36, 672–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Thomas, L.; Levett, K.; Boyd, A.; Leung, D.Y.; Schiller, N.B.; Ross, D.L. Changes in regional left atrial function with aging: Evaluation by Doppler tissue imaging. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2003, 4, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Srivastava, P.M.; Burrell, L.M.; Calafiore, P. Lateral vs. medial mitral annular tissue Doppler in the echocardiographic assessment of diastolic function and filling pressures: Which should we use? Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2005, 6, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Nikitin, N.P.; Witte, K.K.; Thackray, S.D.; de Silva, R.; Clark, A.L.; Cleland, J.G. Longitudinal ventricular function: Normal values of atrioventricular annular and myocardial velocities measured with quantitative two-dimensional color Doppler tissue imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2003, 16, 906–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Mogelvang, R.; Sogaard, P.; Pedersen, S.A.; Olsen, N.T.; Schnohr, P.; Jensen, J.S. Tissue Doppler echocardiography in persons with hypertension, diabetes, or ischaemic heart disease: The Copenhagen City Heart Study. Eur. Heart J. 2009, 30, 731–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Melenovsky, V.; Borlaug, B.A.; Rosen, B.; Hay, I.; Ferruci, L.; Morell, C.H.; Lakatta, E.G.; Najjar, S.S.; Kass, D.A. Cardiovascular features of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction versus nonfailing hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy in the urban Baltimore community: The role of atrial remodeling/dysfunction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007, 49, 198–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Farias, C.A.; Rodriguez, L.; Garcia, M.J.; Sun, J.P.; Klein, A.L.; Thomas, J.D. Assessment of diastolic function by tissue Doppler echocardiography: Comparison with standard transmitral and pulmonary venous flow. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 1999, 12, 609–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Biering-Sørensen, T.; Olsen, F.J.; Storm, K.; Fritz-Hansen, T.; Olsen, N.T.; Jøns, C.; Vinther, M.; Søgaard, P.; Risum, N. Prognostic value of tissue Doppler imaging for predicting ventricular arrhythmias and cardiovascular mortality in ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2016, 17, 722–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Nagueh, S.F.; Rao, L.; Soto, J.; Middleton, K.J.; Khoury, D.S. Haemodynamic insights into the effects of ischaemia and cycle length on tissue Doppler-derived mitral annulus diastolic velocities. Clin. Sci. 2004, 106, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Nagueh, S.F.; Sun, H.; Kopelen, H.A.; Middleton, K.J.; Khoury, D.S. Hemodynamic determinants of the mitral annulus diastolic velocities by tissue Doppler. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2001, 37, 278–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Rivas-Gotz, C.; Khoury, D.S.; Manolios, M.; Rao, L.; Kopelen, H.A.; Nagueh, S.F. Time interval between onset of mitral inflow and onset of early diastolic velocity by tissue Doppler: A novel index of left ventricular relaxation: Experimental studies and clinical application. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2003, 42, 1463–1470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Johansson, B.; Fengsrud, E.; Lundin, F.; Bojö, L.; Poci, D. The a’velocity by tissue-Doppler echocardiography correlates to invasive mean left atrial pressure in patients with normal ejection fraction. Scand. Cardiovasc. J. 2022, 56, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Oki, T.; Tabata, T.; Yamada, H.; Wakatsuki, T.; Mishiro, Y.; Abe, M.; Onose, Y.; Iuchi, A.; Ito, S. Left ventricular diastolic properties of hypertensive patients measured by pulsed tissue Doppler imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 1998, 11, 1106–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Saraiva, R.M.; Demirkol, S.; Buakhamsri, A.; Greenberg, N.; Popović, Z.B.; Thomas, J.D.; Klein, A.L. Left atrial strain measured by two-dimensional speckle tracking represents a new tool to evaluate left atrial function. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2010, 23, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Masuda, M.; Iwakura, K.; Inoue, K.; Okamura, A.; Koyama, Y.; Toyoshima, Y.; Tanaka, N.; Nakanishi, H.; Sotomi, Y.; Komuro, I.; et al. Estimation of left atrial blood stasis using diastolic late mitral annular velocity. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2013, 14, 752–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Johansson, B.; Lundin, F.; Tegeback, R.; Bojö, L. The a’ velocity in the tissue Doppler predicts S/D ratio <1 in patients with a normal ejection fraction. Scand. Cardiovasc. J. 2018, 52, 183–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Masuda, M.; Iwakura, K.; Inoue, K.; Okamura, A.; Koyama, Y.; Kimura, R.; Doi, A.; Toyoshima, Y.; Komuro, I.; Fujii, K. Estimation of left atrial pump function by mitral annular velocity. Circ. J. 2012, 76, 1430–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Obokata, M.; Negishi, K.; Kurosawa, K.; Arima, H.; Tateno, R.; Ui, G.; Tange, S.; Arai, M.; Kurabayashi, M. Incremental diagnostic value of la strain with leg lifts in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2013, 6, 749–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Oike, F.; Yamamoto, E.; Sueta, D.; Tokitsu, T.; Usuku, H.; Nishihara, T.; Takae, M.; Fujisue, K.; Arima, Y.; Kanazawa, H.; et al. Clinical significance of diastolic late mitral annular velocity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Int. J. Cardiol. 2020, 316, 145–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Daimon, M.; Watanabe, H.; Abe, Y.; Hirata, K.; Hozumi, T.; Ishii, K.; Ito, H.; Iwakura, K.; Izumi, C.; Matsuzaki, M.; et al. Normal values of echocardiographic parameters in relation to age in a healthy Japanese population: The JAMP study. Circ. J. 2008, 72, 1859–1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Ruohonen, S.; Koskenvuo, J.W.; Wendelin-Saarenhovi, M.; Savontaus, M.; Kähönen, M.; Laitinen, T.; Lehtimäki, T.; Jokinen, E.; Viikari, J.; Juonala, M.; et al. Reference Values for Echocardiography in Middle-Aged Population: The Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study. Echocardiography 2016, 33, 193–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Caballero, L.; Kou, S.; Dulgheru, R.; Gonjilashvili, N.; Athanassopoulos, G.D.; Barone, D.; Baroni, M.; Cardim, N.; Gomez de Diego, J.J.; Oliva, M.J.; et al. Echocardiographic reference ranges for normal cardiac Doppler data: Results from the NORRE Study. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2015, 16, 1031–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Yao, G.H.; Zhang, M.; Yin, L.X.; Zhang, C.; Xu, M.J.; Deng, Y.; Liu, Y.; Deng, Y.B.; Ren, W.D.; Li, Z.A.; et al. Doppler Echocardiographic Measurements in Normal Chinese Adults (EMINCA): A prospective, nationwide, and multicentre study. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2016, 17, 512–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Yamamoto, T.; Oki, T.; Yamada, H.; Tanaka, H.; Ishimoto, T.; Wakatsuki, T.; Tabata, T.; Ito, S. Prognostic value of the atrial systolic mitral annular motion velocity in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2003, 16, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Wang, M.; Yip, G.W.; Wang, A.Y.; Zhang, Y.; Ho, P.Y.; Tse, M.K.; Lam, P.K.; Sanderson, J.E. Peak early diastolic mitral annulus velocity by tissue Doppler imaging adds independent and incremental prognostic value. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2003, 41, 820–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Tarsia, C.; Gaspardone, C.; Sgueglia, G.A.; De Santis, A.; D’Ascoli, E.; Piccioni, F.; Iamele, M.; Posteraro, G.A.; Cinque, A.; Gaspardone, A. Atrial function analysis after percutaneous umbrella device and suture-mediated patent fossa ovalis closure. Minerva Cardiol. Angiol. 2023, 71, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Mogelvang, R.; Biering-Sørensen, T.; Jensen, J.S. Tissue Doppler echocardiography predicts acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and cardiovascular death in the general population. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2015, 16, 1331–1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Stahrenberg, R.; Edelmann, F.; Haase, B.; Lahno, R.; Seegers, J.; Weber-Krüger, M.; Mende, M.; Wohlfahrt, J.; Kermer, P.; Vollmann, D.; et al. Transthoracic echocardiography to rule out paroxysmal atrial fibrillation as a cause of stroke or transient ischemic attack. Stroke 2011, 42, 3643–3645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Iwahashi, N.; Gohbara, M.; Abe, T.; Kirigaya, J.; Horii, M.; Hanajima, Y.; Takahashi, H.; Minamimoto, Y.; Kimura, Y.; Akiyama, E.; et al. Clinical Significance of Late Diastolic Tissue Doppler Velocity at 24 Hours or 14 Days After Onset of ST-Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction. Circ. Rep. 2021, 3, 396–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Okura, H.; Kataoka, T.; Yoshida, K. Comparison of Left Ventricular Relaxation and Left Atrial Function in Patients with Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction Versus Patients With Systemic Hypertension and Healthy Subjects. Am. J. Cardiol. 2016, 118, 1019–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Müller, P.; Weijs, B.; Bemelmans, N.M.A.A.; Mügge, A.; Eckardt, L.; Crijns, H.J.G.M.; Bax, J.J.; Linz, D.; den Uijl, D.W. Echocardiography-derived total atrial conduction time: Risk stratification and guidance in atrial fibrillation management. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2021, 110, 1734–1742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Huang, F.Q.; Tan, R.S.; Sim, D.; Le, T.T.; Zhong, L. Left ventricular diastolic function assessment using time differences between mitral annular velocities and transmitral inflow velocities in patients with heart failure. Heart Lung Circ. 2015, 24, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Bianco, C.M.; Farjo, P.D.; Ghaffar, Y.A.; Sengupta, P.P. Myocardial Mechanics in Patients With Normal LVEF and Diastolic Dysfunction. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 13 Pt 2, 258–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Park, H.J.; Jung, H.O.; Min, J.; Park, M.W.; Park, C.S.; Shin, D.I.; Shin, W.S.; Kim, P.J.; Youn, H.J.; Seung, K.B. Left atrial volume index over late diastolic mitral annulus velocity (LAVI/A’) is a useful echo index to identify advanced diastolic dysfunction and predict clinical outcomes. Clin Cardiol. 2011, 34, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Toh, N.; Kanzaki, H.; Nakatani, S.; Ohara, T.; Kim, J.; Kusano, K.F.; Hashimura, K.; Ohe, T.; Ito, H.; Kitakaze, M. Left atrial volume combined with atrial pump function identifies hypertensive patients with a history of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Hypertension 2010, 55, 1150–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Matsuura, H.; Yamada, A.; Sugimoto, K.; Sugimoto, K.; Iwase, M.; Ishikawa, T.; Ishii, J.; Ozaki, Y. Clinical implication of LAVI over A’ ratio in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Heart Asia 2018, 10, e011038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Benfari, G.; Essayagh, B.; Nistri, S.; Maalouf, J.; Rossi, A.; Thapa, P.; Michelena, H.I.; Enriquez-Sarano, M. Left Atrial Volumetric/Mechanical Coupling Index: A Novel Predictor of Outcome in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2021, 14, e011608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Essayagh, B.; Benfari, G.; Antoine, C.; Maalouf, J.; Pislaru, S.; Thapa, P.; Michelena, H.I.; Enriquez-Sarano, M. Incremental Prognosis by Left Atrial Functional Assessment: The Left Atrial Coupling Index in Patients with Floppy Mitral Valves. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2022, 11, e024814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  138. Benfari, G.; Skaarup, K.G.; Johansen, N.D.; Jensen, G.; Schnohr, P.; Møgelvang, R.; Nistri, S.; Biering-Sørensen, T. Left Atrial Volumetric/Mechanical Coupling Index in the General Population: Distribution and Prediction of Incident Atrial Fibrillation: From the Copenhagen City Heart Study. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2023, 36, 339–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Tabata, T.; Thomas, J.D.; Klein, A.L. Pulmonary venous flow by doppler echocardiography: Revisited 12 years later. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2003, 41, 1243–1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Kadappu, K.K.; Thomas, L. Tissue Doppler imaging in echocardiography: Value and limitations. Heart Lung Circ. 2015, 24, 224–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Soeki, T.; Fukuda, N.; Shinohara, H.; Sakabe, K.; Onose, Y.; Sawada, Y.; Tamura, Y. Mitral inflow and mitral annular motion velocities in patients with mitral annular calcification: Evaluation by pulsed Doppler echocardiography and pulsed Doppler tissue imaging. Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 2002, 3, 128–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jcdd 11 00241 g001
Figure 1. Left atrial pressure-volume loop, with a qualitative representation of a left atrial (LA) pressure-volume loop and corresponding echocardiographic evaluations of LA volumes. Maximal LA volume (usually reported in clinical echocardiography as LAVI) occurs at the end of the reservoir phase, while the conduit phase can be captured by LA volume pre-A. Minimum LA volume corresponds to the end of the LA contractile phase. Superimposed arrows indicate the time-course.
Figure 1. Left atrial pressure-volume loop, with a qualitative representation of a left atrial (LA) pressure-volume loop and corresponding echocardiographic evaluations of LA volumes. Maximal LA volume (usually reported in clinical echocardiography as LAVI) occurs at the end of the reservoir phase, while the conduit phase can be captured by LA volume pre-A. Minimum LA volume corresponds to the end of the LA contractile phase. Superimposed arrows indicate the time-course.
Jcdd 11 00241 g001
Jcdd 11 00241 g002
Figure 2. Measurement of LA volume and function in a healthy individual. LA maximal and minimal volumes by four-chamber (upper left) and two-chamber (lower left) views in a 30-year-old healthy man. LAVI is 31 mL/m2 and LAEF 59%. In the right panel, the LA function by biplane STE is depicted: the average LA strain is 43%.
Figure 2. Measurement of LA volume and function in a healthy individual. LA maximal and minimal volumes by four-chamber (upper left) and two-chamber (lower left) views in a 30-year-old healthy man. LAVI is 31 mL/m2 and LAEF 59%. In the right panel, the LA function by biplane STE is depicted: the average LA strain is 43%.
Jcdd 11 00241 g002
Jcdd 11 00241 g003
Figure 3. Measurement of LA volume and function in a patient with heart failure. LA maximal and minimal volumes by four-chamber (upper left) and two-chamber (lower left) views in a 56-year-old male with heart failure and mildly reduced ejection fraction. LAVI is 43 mL/m2 and LAEF 35%. In the right panel, the LA function by biplane STE is depicted: the average peak LA strain is 19%.
Figure 3. Measurement of LA volume and function in a patient with heart failure. LA maximal and minimal volumes by four-chamber (upper left) and two-chamber (lower left) views in a 56-year-old male with heart failure and mildly reduced ejection fraction. LAVI is 43 mL/m2 and LAEF 35%. In the right panel, the LA function by biplane STE is depicted: the average peak LA strain is 19%.
Jcdd 11 00241 g003
Jcdd 11 00241 g004
Figure 4. Age and diastolic velocities by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI). Septal TDI traces measured in three healthy male individuals (aged 17, 33, and 62 years) are reported to show the inverse behaviors of early (e’) and late (a’) diastolic TDI velocities across different ages. At 17 years, TDI-e’ and a’ were16 and 6 cm/s, respectively (left panel); at 33 years (mid panel), TDI-e’ and a’ were 11 and 9 cm/s, respectively; at 62 years (right panel), TDI-e’ and a’ were 8 and 11 cm/s, respectively.
Figure 4. Age and diastolic velocities by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI). Septal TDI traces measured in three healthy male individuals (aged 17, 33, and 62 years) are reported to show the inverse behaviors of early (e’) and late (a’) diastolic TDI velocities across different ages. At 17 years, TDI-e’ and a’ were16 and 6 cm/s, respectively (left panel); at 33 years (mid panel), TDI-e’ and a’ were 11 and 9 cm/s, respectively; at 62 years (right panel), TDI-e’ and a’ were 8 and 11 cm/s, respectively.
Jcdd 11 00241 g004
Table 1. Volumetric indices to assess left atrial function.
Table 1. Volumetric indices to assess left atrial function.
LA FunctionFunctional ParameterCalculation
Global functionLA EF(LAmax − LAmin)/LAmax
Reservoir functionExpansion index(LAmax − LAmin)/LAmin
Conduit functionPassive EF(LAmax − LApreA)/LAmax
Booster pumpActive EF(LApreA − LAmin)/LApreA
See the manuscript for abbreviations.
Table 2. Spectral Doppler indices to assess left atrial function.
Table 2. Spectral Doppler indices to assess left atrial function.
MethodMeasurementClinical Applicability
E/A ratioE/A ratio, E-VTI/A-VTIdiastolic function
Atrial filling fractionA-VTI/(E-VTI+A-VTI)atrial contribution
S/D ratioS-VTI/D-VTIrelative reservoir to conduit contribution
pulmonary vein atrial reversal wave (Ar)Ar velocity and durationatrial contractility
LA ejection force0.5 × blood density × mitral orifice area × A velocityLA systolic function
LA kinetic energy0.5 × blood density × (LAVIpreA-LAVImin) × A velocityLA work
See the manuscript for abbreviations.
Table 3. Normal values of 2D and 3D LA EF and LA strain.
Table 3. Normal values of 2D and 3D LA EF and LA strain.
StudyN. PatientsLA EF 2D (%) Mean (IQR)
or ± SD		LA EF 3D (%) Mean (IQR)
or ± SD		PALS (%) Mean (IQR)
or ± SD
Morris et al., 2015 [36]32965.8 ± 7.5
LLN 51.1		-45.5 ± 11.4
LLN 23.1
Pathan et al., 2016 [37]meta-analysis 40 studies
2542		--39 (95% CI 38–41)
Sugimoto et al., 2018 [38]37168.5
(63.2 to 73.2)
LLN 48.7 ± 1.9		57.3
(52.4 to 61.9)
LLN 41.4 ± 1.1		42.5
(36.1 to 48.0)
LLN 26.1
Takeuchi et al., 2019 [39]313 -M 48 ± 9
F 48 ± 11		-
Sun et al.,
2020 [40]		324--35.9 ± 10.6
Singh et al.,
2021 [15]		176565.7 ± 8.462.2 ± 7.742.1 ± 10.0
Nielsen et al., 2021 [41]1641--39.4
(33.2–46.6)
Wang et al.,
2024 [42]		783-M 57.3 ± 5.7
F 57.5 ± 6.4
LLN
M 46; F 44		-
Yafasov et al., 2024 [43]979-61 ± 631.2 ± 6.3
Based on the way data were reported by single studies, numbers are mean (IQR) or ± SD. Moreover, when available, LLNs are included. Abbreviations: CI: confidence interval; F: females; IQR: interquartile ranges; LLN: lower limit of normal; M: males; PALS: peak left atrial longitudinal strain. SD: standard deviation.
Table 5. Studies regarding LA function measured by LA strain.
Table 5. Studies regarding LA function measured by LA strain.
AuthorPopulationPrincipal Findings Regarding LA Function, Measured by PALS
Cameli et al., 2012 [85]312 adults in SRPALS < 18.8% is associated with the development of the first CV event (sens. 78.2%, spec 85.2%, AUC 0.83)
Freed et al., 2016 [86]308 HFpEF longitudinally followed1-SD decrease in PALS is associated with composite outcome of hospitalization or death (HR 1.54)
Santos et al., 2016 [87]357 HFpEF enrolled in the TOPCAT studyUnit reduction in PALS is associated with an increased risk of CV events
Morris et al., 2017 [88]517 patients in SR and risk factors for LVDDAdding LA strain (cut-off < 23%) to LAVI significantly improves the detection of LVDD in indeterminate LV diastolic function
Cameli et al., 2019 [89]276 patients with asymptomatic moderate MRPALS < 35% is associated with the development of CV events (AUC 0.87)
Park et al., 2020 [73]2461 patients with AHF and SRPALS < 18% predicts new-onset AF at 5 years (AUC 0.53)
Nielsen et al., 2020 [90]Meta-analysis of 1025 patients undergoing RFA for AFPALS significantly predicts AF recurrence (multivariate OR 1.16 CI95% [1.09–1.24], p < 0.001, per 1% decrease)
Park et al., 2021 [74]3818 AHF patientsPALS is a significant predictor of events regardless of HF phenotype (multivariate PALS < 8.8%: HR 1.637, p = 0.001, PALS 8.8-16.5%: HR 1.416, p = 0.004)
Inoue et al., 2021 [63]322 patients with CV disease of different etiologiesPALS < 18.0% predicts elevated LV falling pressure
Pagola et al., 2021 [82]253 patients with cryptogenic stroke followed for 2 yearsPALS < 25.3% predicted HpAF with a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 60% (AUC 0.73)
Hauser et al., 2021 [55]3590 general population in SRPatients with PALS < 23% have a 6.8 increased risk of developing AF; with multivariate, PALS remained an independent predictor of AF [HR 1.05, 95% CI (1.03–1.07), p < 0.001, per 1% decrease]
Alhakak et al., 2022 [83]400 general population in SRPALS independently predicts AF in participants < 65 years (HR 1.46; 95% CI (1.06–2.02), p = 0.021, per 5% decrease)
Aimo et al., 2022 [75]423 patients screened for cardiac amyloidosisPALS < 6.65% gives 3.6-fold risk of cardiac amyloidosis
Thellier et al., 2023 [78]387 patients with severe aortic stenosisPALS < 14% improves mortality risk stratification over diastolic dysfunction grades
Madsen et al., 2023 [69]381 patients with ACSWith univariate analysis, PALS predicts new onset of AF (HR: 1.05, p < 0.01, per 1% decrease)
Gomes et al., 2023 [80]307 HFrEF with functional MRPALS predicts all-cause mortality with HR: 1.05 per each 1% decrease
Takagi et al., 2023 [84]335 patientsPALS < 22% predicts new-onset AF (AUC: 0.89)
Anagnostopoulos et al., 2023 [81]Meta-analysis of 2081 patients with cryptogenic strokePALS < 20% presents 71% sensitivity and 71% specificity for the diagnosis of occult AF
Pastore et al., 2024 [72]310 patients undergoing isolated CABGmultivariate analysis, PALS < 28% carries a 3.6-fold higher risk of postoperative AF
Based on the way data were reported by single studies. Abbreviations: ACS: acute coronary syndrome; AHF: acute heart failure; AUC: area under curve; CABG: coronary artery bypass graft; CI: confidence interval; CV: cardiovascular; HFeEF: HF with reduced ejection fraction; HFpEF: HF with preserved ejection fraction; HpAF: paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with high risk of embolization (AF episodes > 5 h); HR: hazard ratio; LAVI: left atrial volume index; LVDD: left ventricular diastolic dysfunction; MR: mitral regurgitation; PALS: peak atrial longitudinal strain; RFA: radiofrequency ablation; SD: standard deviation; SR: sinus rhythm.
Table 6. Normal values of TDI-a’.
Table 6. Normal values of TDI-a’.
StudyN. PatientsAge (Years)TDI-a’ Septal
Mean (IQR)
or ± SD		TDI-a’ Lateral
Mean (IQR)
or ± SD		TDI-a’ Average Mean (IQR)
or ± SD
Daimon et al., 2008 [120]M 383
F 317		20–79M 9.2 ± 2.1
F 8.2 ± 2.4		M 9.0 ± 3.0
F 8.3 ± 2.7		-
Ruohonen et al., 2015 [121]M 444
F 635		34–49M 12.9 ± 2.2 *
F 12.4 ± 2.1 *		M 14.0 ± 3.0 *
F 13.7 ± 3.0 *		-
Caballero et al., 2015 [122]44420–759.4 ± 2.0
IQR
8.0–11.0		9.2 ± 2.7
IQR
7.0–11.0		11.9 ± 3.3
IQR
9.25–14.0
Yao et al., 2016 [123]M 678
F 716		18–79M 9.4 ± 2.1
F 8.9 ± 2.1		M 9.9 ± 2.6
F 9.8 ± 2.8		M 9.6 ± 2.1
F 9.3 + 2.1
Ballo et al., 2017 [17]2827–84--10.1 ± 2.4
Based on the way data were reported by single studies, numbers are mean (IQR) or ± SD unless otherwise specified. Abbreviations: F: females; IQR: interquartile ranges; M: males, SD: standard deviation. * median.
Table 7. Summary of major studies assessing the relevance of TDI-a’ or LAVI/a’ (LACI).
Table 7. Summary of major studies assessing the relevance of TDI-a’ or LAVI/a’ (LACI).
StudyPopulationStudy
Design		Cut-OffAims/
End-Point
Studies with TDI-a’
Yamamoto et al., 2003 [124]HFrEFProspectiveTDI-a’ ≤ 5 cm/sCardiac mortality
Wang et al.,
2003 [125]		Patients with and without cardiovascular diseaseRetrospectiveTDI-a’ < 4 cm/sCardiac death
Mogelvang et al., 2015 [127]General populationProspectiveHR 1.17 for 1 cm/s decrease in
TDI-a’		Acute myocardial infarction, HF, CV death
Biering-Sorensen et al.,
2016 [107]		Ischemic cardiomyopathy ProspectiveMultivariate TDI-a’ HR 1.25Arrhythmic events,
CV death
Oike et al.,
2020 [119]		HFpEFProspectiveTDI-a’ > 7.45 cm/sCV and HF events
Iwahashi et al., 2021 [129]ST-elevation
myocardial infarction		ProspectiveTDI-a’ < 9.4 cm/s
at 24 h		Major adverse CV events
Studies with LAVI/a’ (LACI)
Stahrenberg et al., 2011 [128]Cerebral ischemiaProspectiveLAVI/a’ < 2.5
to rule out AF		AF onset
Park et al., 2011 [134]Patients with dyspnea (NYHA II-IV)ProspectiveLAVI/a’ ≥ 4
higher incidence of outcome		Cardiac death/ rehospitalization HF
Benfari et al., 2021 [137]HFrEF in sinus rhythm with MRProspectiveLAVI/a’ ≥ 6
excess mortality		Survival
Essayagh et al., 2022 [138]Patients with floppy mitral valve in sinus rhythmProspectiveLAVI/a’ ≥ 5
excess mortality		Survival
Benfari et al., 2023 [139]General populationProspectiveLAVI/a’ > 3.9AF onset independently from CHARGE-AF and CHA2DS2-Vasc
See the manuscript for abbreviations.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mangia, M.; D’Andrea, E.; Cecchetto, A.; Beccari, R.; Mele, D.; Nistri, S. Current and Clinically Relevant Echocardiographic Parameters to Analyze Left Atrial Function. J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2024, 11, 241. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11080241

AMA Style

Mangia M, D’Andrea E, Cecchetto A, Beccari R, Mele D, Nistri S. Current and Clinically Relevant Echocardiographic Parameters to Analyze Left Atrial Function. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease. 2024; 11(8):241. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11080241

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mangia, Mario, Emilio D’Andrea, Antonella Cecchetto, Riccardo Beccari, Donato Mele, and Stefano Nistri. 2024. "Current and Clinically Relevant Echocardiographic Parameters to Analyze Left Atrial Function" Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease 11, no. 8: 241. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11080241

APA Style

Mangia, M., D’Andrea, E., Cecchetto, A., Beccari, R., Mele, D., & Nistri, S. (2024). Current and Clinically Relevant Echocardiographic Parameters to Analyze Left Atrial Function. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease, 11(8), 241. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11080241

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop