Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2025

Magnetic Resonance Derived Myocardial Strain Assessment Using Feature Tracking
Published on: February 12, 2011
The Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Strain Analysis in Heart Failure with Preserved
Shiwen Zhang1,2, Yufei Zhou3, Shuguang Han4
1Department of Cardiology, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan 200001, Shandong, China.
Insights
Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) strain analysis aids in diagnosing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Combined left ventricular (LV) strain analysis offers superior diagnostic and prognostic value for HFpEF compared to individual strain measurements.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Imaging
- Diagnostic Tools
Background:
- Strain analysis using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is vital for diagnosing and predicting outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).
- Understanding the diagnostic and prognostic capabilities of CMR-derived strain parameters in HFpEF is crucial for clinical management.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic utility of various strain parameters obtained through CMR in patients with HFpEF.
- To compare the diagnostic and prognostic performance of individual versus combined strain analyses.
Main Methods:
- Patients with HFpEF and controls underwent comprehensive assessments, including echocardiography and CMR.
- Key strain parameters such as global longitudinal strain, global circumferential strain (GCS), and global radial strain were measured in the left ventricle (LV), right ventricle (RV), and left atrium.
- Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was utilized to assess the diagnostic and prognostic values of these strain parameters.
Main Results:
- All measured strain parameters, except for RVGCS, demonstrated significant diagnostic value for HFpEF.
- Combined LV strain analysis yielded the highest diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.858) compared to individual LV strains.
- While individual strains lacked prognostic value, combined LV strain analysis showed significant prognostic relevance for predicting HFpEF outcomes (AUC = 0.722).
Conclusions:
- Individual CMR strain analysis is valuable for diagnosing HFpEF.
- The combined analysis of LV strain parameters provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for HFpEF.
- Combined LV strain analysis is prognostically valuable for predicting outcomes in HFpEF patients, whereas individual strain measurements are not.
Background:
Strain analysis of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is critical for the diagnosis and prognosis of heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Our study aimed to identify the diagnostic and prognostic value of strain analysis revealed by CMR in HFpEF.
Methods:
Participants in HFpEF and control were recruited according to the guideline. Baseline information, clinical parameters, blood samples were collected, and echocardiography and CMR examination were performed. Various parameters, including global longitudinal strain, global circumferential strain (GCS) and global radial strain in left ventricle (LV), right ventricle (RV), and left atrium, were measured from CMR. Receiver operator curve (ROC) was established to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of strains in HFpEF.
Results:
Seven strains, with the exception of RVGCS, were employed to generate ROC curves after t-test. All strains had significant diagnostic value for HFpEF. The area under curve (AUC) of LV strains was greater than 0.7 and the AUC of the combined analysis of LV strains was 0.858 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.798-0.919, sensitivity: 0.713, specificity: 0.875, P < 0.001), indicating that they had a higher diagnostic value than individual LV strains. However, individual strains had no predictive value in identifying end-point events in HFpEF, the AUC of coanalysis of LV strains was 0.722 (95% CI: 0.573-0.872, sensitivity: 0.500, specificity: 0.959, P = 0.004), indicating its prognostic relevance.
Conclusion:
Individual strain analysis in CMR may be useful for diagnosing HFpEF, the combination of LV strain analysis had the highest diagnostic value. Moreover, the prognostic value of individual strain analysis in predicting HFpEF outcome was not satisfactory while the combined usage of LV strain analysis was prognostically valuable in HFpEF outcome prediction.
More Related Videos
08:10Estimating Bilateral Atrial Function by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Feature Tracking in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: July 20, 2022
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
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Rheumatic Heart Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Mitral Stenosis II: Clinical features and Diagnostic Tests
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests