Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 20, 2025

Using Digital Image Correlation to Characterize Local Strains on Vascular Tissue Specimens
Published on: January 24, 2016
Vendor differences in 2D-speckle tracking global longitudinal strain: an update on a 10-year standardization effort
Anca Balinisteanu1,2, Jürgen Duchenne1,3,4, Alexis Puvrez1
1Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Aims:
To assess the inter-vendor differences in global longitudinal strain measurements and determine a potential improvement compared with the situation 10 years ago.
Methods And Results:
372 echocardiographic exams were performed in 62 subjects (50 male, age 56 ± 17) with LV ejection fraction ranging from 30% to 68%, using ultrasound systems from six manufacturers: GE, Philips, Canon, Siemens, Fujifilm and Esaote. Each subject was scanned consecutively on all machines by the same assigned sonographer, with two image sets per subject to assess test-retest setting reproducibility. Average peak systolic global strain from the three apical views (GLSAV) was measured on three vendor-specific (Canon, Siemens, and Fujifilm) and six vendor-agnostic (GE, Philips, US2.AI, Caas Qardia, Medis, and Epsilon) software solutions (SWS). Endocardial and mid-/full-wall GLS were measured and compared with the mean GLS of contemporary semi-automated clinical software: GE, Philips, Canon, Fujifilm, and Caas Qardia. Endocardial and mid-/full-wall GLS measurements from contemporary semi-automated clinical software showed minimal inter-vendor differences, with an average maximum bias of 0.6% strain units. There was a remaining inter-vendor bias with and among some other vendors. The average minimal detectable change with contemporary semi-automated clinical software was 2.5 and 2.4 strain% for endocardial and mid-/full-wall GLS, resp. These values were higher for and among some other vendors. Test-retest variability of GLS measurements was good and similar to that of LV ejection fraction (6.6% vs. 6.5%, P > 0.05), indicating consistent results across repeated scans.
Conclusion:
In this controlled study setting, GLS measurements from companies that provide contemporary semi-automated clinical software have become more consistent, compared with 10 years ago. Mid-/full-wall strain was now available in all but one software.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Measurements of Strain
Transformation of Plane Strain
Under plane strain conditions, typical for members where one dimension significantly exceeds the others, deformations and resultant strains are...
Normal Strain under Axial Loading
Three-Dimensional Analysis of Strain
Stress-Strain Diagram

