Asymptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction in hypertensive patients with disturbed ventriculo arterial coupling

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) is most commonly used validated echocardiographic parameter of systolic function estimation, but left ventricular (LV) global longitudinal strain (GLS) is an early indicator of subclinical cardiac dysfunction, even when LVEF is normal. Purpose To investigate ventriculo – arterial coupling (VAC) and LV function in asymptomatic hypertensive patients without target organ damage to compare different echocardiographic parameters for systolic function. Methods A total 110 patients (56 ± 14 years) with hypertension, were separated in two groups: 32(men, ( 59 %)) patients with normal AE/Ees ratio (Arterial elastance (AE) and ventricular elastance (Ees)) and 78 (men, ( 64%)) hypertensive patients with decrease AE/Ees ratio, marker for ventriculo – arterial coupling. All patients underwent standard two – dimentional echocardiography with Speckle tracking analysis for LV - GLS. End – systolic pressure was determined from the brachial pulse wave. Arterial elastance (AE) and ventricular elastance (Ees) were calculated as and – systolic pressure/stroke volume and end – systolic pressure/end – systolic volume. Results Patients with disturbed VAC had concentric hypertrophy whereas patients with normal VAC had concentric remodeling. There were no significant differences in EF, but GLS in all patients was reduced. There were no statistically significant differences in LV diastolic function parameters. Statistically significant differences in echocardiographic parameters were found in patients with normal VAC in comparison with disturbed VAC (TABL. 1), There are negative correlation between LV - GLS and AE/Ees (r = -0.327, p = 0.001) and positive with Ees (r=0.250, p = 0.015). Conclusion LV - GLS is a more sensitive parameter of LV systolic function than LVEF, when LV concentric hypertrophy is present in hypertensive patients. Further investigation are needed to confirm the superiority of GLS over LVEF in LV systolic function estimation and its implementation in clinical practice.