Advertisement

Relationship between left ventricular hypertrophy, hypertensive retinopathy, microalbuminuria and echocardiographic modalities in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients

  • Ahmet Kaya Bilge
  • Dursun Atilgan
  • Imran Onur
  • Burak Pamukcu
  • Mustafa Ozcan
  • Kâmil Adalet
Original Paper

Abstract

Longitudinal myocardial function (LMF) may be impaired while systolic function is still normal. We investigated relationship between LMF and hypertensive organ damage in newly diagnosed stage I hypertensive patients. A total of 57 patient with never treated stage I hypertension and 48 matched healthy control subject were enrolled in the study. Conventional 2-D, Doppler and tissue wave Doppler imaging (TDI) echocardiography were used. LMF was evaluated by the septal and lateral strain (S) and strain rate (SR) measurements. Hypertensive complications were evaluated by the urine microalbumin levels and retinal examination. A multivariate regression analysis was perfomed to assess the relation between the variables. Ejection fraction, mid-wall fractional shortenning, systolic movement rates (TDs) in TDI were similar both in hypertensive and control groups. In patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, septal TDs (7.29 ± 1.28 vs. 8.06 ± 1.19 cm, P = 0.03), lateral TDs (8.46 ± 1.83 vs. 9.87 ± 2.42 cm, P = 0.01) and lateral S (−13.02 ± 7.83 vs. −18.86 ± 8.60%, P = 0.01) values were significantly lower. Septal S (−13.67 ± 3.52 vs. −19.09 ± 5.96%, P < 0.01) and SR (−0.83 ± 0.29 vs. −1.22 ± 0.28 1/S, P < 0.01) were significantly decreased in hypertensive patients with microalbuminuria. Septal S value was also significantly decreased in patients with retinopathy (−14.76 ± 5.55 vs. −20.20 ± 5.44%, P = 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed that only septal and lateral S values were independent factors for the retinopathy and left ventricular hypertrophy, respectively. In hypertensive patients, LMF established by the measurement of S and SR, might be impaired and also related with end organ damage while global circumferential function is preserved.

Keywords

Strain Strain rate Newly diagnosed hypertension Target organ damage 

References

  1. 1.
    Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP (1990) Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham heart study. N Engl J Med 322:1561–1566PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lauer MS, Evans JC, Levy D (1992) Prognostic implications of subclinical left ventricular dilatation and systolic dysfunction in men free of overt cardiovascular disease (the Framingham Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 70:1180–1184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Redon J, Williams B (2002) Microalbuminuria in essential hypertension: redefining the thresholds. J Hypertens 20:353–355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gerstein HC, Mann JF, Yi Q, Zinman B, Dinneen SF, Hoogwert B et al (2001) Albuminuria and risk of cardiovascular events, death, and heart failure in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals. JAMA 286:421–426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bigazzi R, Bianchi S, Baldari D, Campese VM et al (1998) Microalbuminuria predicts cardiovascular events and renal insufficiency in patients with essential hypertension. J Hypertens 16:1325–1333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Henein MY, Gibson DG (1999) Long axis function in disease. Heart 81:229–231PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Poulsen SH, Andersen NH, Ivarsen PI, Mogensen CE, Egeblad H (2003) Doppler Tissue Imaging reveals systolic dysfunction in patients with hypertension and apparent “isolated” diastolic dysfunction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 16:724–731CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lutas EM, Devereux RB, Reis G, Alderman MH, Pickering TG, Borer JS, Laragh JH (1985) Increased cardiac performance in mild essential hypertension: left ventricular mechanics. Hypertension 7:979–988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Simone G, Di Lorenzo L, Constantino G, Moccia D, Buonissimo S, de Divitiis O (1988) Supernormal contractility in primary hypertension without left ventricular hypertrophy. Hypertension 11:457–463PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Blake J, Devereux RB, Herrold EM, Jason M, Fisher J, Borer JS, Laragh JH (1988) Relation of concentric left ventricular hypertrophy anf extracardiac target organ damage to supranormal left ventricular performance in established hypertension. Am J Cardiol 62:246–252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hartford M, Wikstrand JC, Wallentin I, Ljungman SM, Berglund GL (1985) Left ventricular wall stress and systolic function in untreated primary hypertension. Hypertension 7:97–104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    D’hooge J, Heimdal A, Jamal F, Kukulski T, Bijnens B, Rademakers F, Hatle L, Suetens P, Sutherland GR (2000) Regional strain and strain rate measurements by cardiac ultrasound: principles, ımplementation and limitations. Eur J Echocardiogr 1:154–170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Urheim S, Edvardsen T, Torp H, Angelsen B, Smiseth OA (2000) Myocardial strain by Doppler echocardiography: validation of a new Doppler method to quantify regional myocardial function. Circulation 102:1158–1164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Koyama J, Ray-Sequin P, Falk RH (2003) Longitudinal myocardial function assessed by tissue velocity, strain and strain rate tissue Doppler echocardiography in patients with AL (primary) cardiac amyloidosis. Circulation 107:2446–2452CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ballo P, Quatrini I, Giacomin E, Motto A, Mondillo S (2007) Circumferential versus longitudinal systolic function in patients with hypertension: a nonlinear relation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 20:298–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kato TS, Noda A, Izawa A, Yamada A, Obata K, Nagata K, Iwase M, Murohara T, Yokota M (2004) Discrimination of nonobstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy from hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy on the basis of strain rate imaging by tissue Doppler ultrasonography. Circulation 110:3808–3814CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saghir M, Areces M, Makan M (2007) Strain rate imaging differentiates hypertensive cardiac hypertrophy from physiologic cardiac hypertrophy (athlete’s heart). J Am Soc Echocardiogr 20:151–157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr et al (2003) The national high blood pressure education program coordinating committee seventh report of the joint national committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure. Hypertension 42:1206–1252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA, Picard MH, Roman MJ, Seward J, Shanewise JS, Solomon SD, Spencer KT, Sutton MS, Stewart WJ (2005) Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from American society of echocardiography’s guidelines and standard committee and the chamber quantification writing group, developed in conjuction with the European association of echocardiography, a branch of the European society of cardiology. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 18:1440–1463CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Devereux RB, Roman MJ (1995) Evaluation of cardiac and vascular structure by echocardiography and other noninvasive techniques. In: Laragh JH, Brenner BM (eds) Hypertension: pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment. Raven Pres, New York, pp 1969–1985Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tei C (1995) New non-invasive index for for combined systolic and diastolic ventricular function. J Am Coll Cardiol 26:135–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marshall SM, Alberti KG (1989) Comparison of the prevalence and associated features of abnormal albumin excretion in insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent diabetes. Q J Med 70:61–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keith NM, Wagener HP (1974) Barker NW: some different types of essential hypertension: their course and prognosis. Am J Med Sci 268:336–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kuznetsova T, Herbots L, Richart T, D’hooge J, Thijs L, Fagard RH, Herregods MC, Staessen JA (2008) Left ventricular strain and strain rate in a general population. Eur Heart J 29:2014–2023CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hare JL, Brown JK, Marwick TH (2008) Association of myocardial strain with left ventricular geometry and progression of hypertensive heart disease. Am J Cardiol 102:87–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim H, Cho HO, Cho YK, Nam CW, Han SW, Hur SH, Kim KS, Kim YN, Kim KB (2008) Relationship between early diastolic strain rate imaging and left ventricular geometric patterns in hypertensive patients. Heart Vessels 23:271–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hoffmann R, Altiok E, Nowak B, Heussen N, Kühl H, Kaiser HJ et al (2002) Strain rate measurement by Doppler echocardiography allows improved assessment of myocardial viability inpatients with depressed left ventricular function. J Am Coll Cardiol 39:443–449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boyer JK, Thanigaraj S, Schechtman KB, Perez JE (2004) Prevalence of ventricular diastolic dysfunction in asymptomatic, normotensivepatients with diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol 93:870–875CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Citro R, Bossone E, Kuersten B, Gregorio G, Salustri A (2008) Tissue Doppler and strain imaging: anything left in the echo-lab? Cardiovasc Ultrasound 6:54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmet Kaya Bilge
    • 1
  • Dursun Atilgan
    • 1
  • Imran Onur
    • 1
  • Burak Pamukcu
    • 1
  • Mustafa Ozcan
    • 1
  • Kâmil Adalet
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cardiology, Istanbul Faculty of MedicineIstanbul UniversityCapa, IstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations