Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 14, 2025

Transthoracic Speckle Tracking Echocardiography for the Quantitative Assessment of Left Ventricular Myocardial Deformation
Published on: October 20, 2016
Left ventricular ejection fraction and Global Longitudinal Strain variability between methodology and experience
Nikos T Kouris1, Vassilis S Kostopoulos1, Georgia A Psarrou1
1General Hospital of Elefsina "Thriassio", Athens, Greece.
Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS) offers more reliable left ventricular (LV) function assessment than ejection fraction (EF). GLS shows lower variability between observers with varying expertise, making it superior for serial evaluations.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Echocardiography
- Cardiac Imaging
Background:
- Ejection fraction (EF) is standard for assessing left ventricular (LV) systolic function but faces measurement challenges.
- These challenges include image quality, LV geometry assumptions, and varying expertise levels among physicians.
- Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS) is an emerging metric for LV function assessment.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the inter-observer variability of EF and GLS measurements.
- To compare the reliability of EF and GLS in patients with diverse LV function.
- To assess the impact of physician expertise on measurement variability.
Main Methods:
- 122 patients underwent EF and GLS measurements by four blinded investigators with differing experience levels.
- EF was assessed using visual estimation, biplane Simpson's method, and an auto-EF technique.
- GLS was measured from three apical views, with significant differences defined as >10 absolute values for EF and >2 for GLS.
Main Results:
- Intra-observer agreement was excellent for visual EF and GLS, and good for Simpson's and auto-EF methods.
- Intra- and inter-observer agreement for GLS was excellent (ICCs > 0.8), with no significant discordance.
- Measurement discordance for EF and GLS was not linked to image quality or wall motion abnormalities.
Conclusions:
- Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS) is more reliable for serial LV function assessment than EF.
- GLS demonstrates lower intra- and inter-observer variability, even across different levels of physician expertise.
- GLS offers a more consistent measure of LV systolic function compared to EF.
More Related Videos
06:34Evaluation of Left Ventricular Structure and Function using 3D Echocardiography
Published on: October 28, 2020
11:50High-frequency High-resolution Echocardiography: First Evidence on Non-invasive Repeated Measure of Myocardial Strain, Contractility, and Mitral Regurgitation in the Ischemia-reperfused Murine Heart
Published on: July 9, 2010