Effect of non‐dipper pattern on echocardiographic myocardial work parameters in normotensive individuals

Background It is known that non‐dipper pattern (NDP) is associated with adverse outcomes in hypertensive patients. However, there is insufficient data on the outcome of NDP in normotensive individuals. Using myocardial work (MW) analysis, as a new echocardiographic examination method, this study aim...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2021-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1586-1595
Main Authors: Efe, Süleyman Cagan, Cicek, Mahmut Buğrahan, Karagöz, Ali, Doğan, Cem, Bayram, Zübeyde, Guvendi, Busra, Akbal, Ozgur Yasar, Tokgoz, Hacer Ceren, Uysal, Samet, Karabağ, Turgut, Kaymaz, Cihangir, Ozdemir, Nihal
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Blood Pressure
Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory
Echocardiography
Humans
Hypertension
myocardial constructive work analysis
myocardial work analysis
non‐dipper hypertension
strain echocardiography
Stroke Volume
Ventricular Function, Left
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background It is known that non‐dipper pattern (NDP) is associated with adverse outcomes in hypertensive patients. However, there is insufficient data on the outcome of NDP in normotensive individuals. Using myocardial work (MW) analysis, as a new echocardiographic examination method, this study aimed to determine the early myocardial effects of NDP in normotensive individuals. Methods This study included 70 normotensive individuals who were followed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). The subjects were divided into two groups according to dipper pattern (DP) and NDP. Conventional, strain, and MW findings were compared between the groups by making echocardiographic evaluations. Results The demographic characteristics, laboratory parameters, and measurements of cardiac chambers, and left ventricular (LV) walls were similar between the groups. There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of LV 3‐2‐4 chambers strains and global longitudinal strain (GLS) values. LVMW parameters, global work index (GWI), and global constrictive work (GCW) were not statistically different between groups (2012 ± 127, 2069 ± 137, p = 0.16; 2327 ± 173, 2418 ± 296, p = 0.18, respectively). However, global waste work (GWW) and global work efficiency (GWE) parameters were different between the groups (144 ± 63.9, 104 ± 24.8, p 
ISSN:0742-2822
1540-8175
DOI:10.1111/echo.15177