Baseline demographic characteristics
The median (25th to 75th percentiles) DWS was 0.36 (0.33–0.42) of the overall study population. In the previous adult study (mean age 56.7 ± 8.3 years), the normal value of the DWS was reported to be 0.40 ± 0.07 [4], and another recent study showed DWS was 0.39 ± 0.06 in the adult group aged 30–50 years [16]. Our median value was slightly lowered compared to previous normal cut-off values. We divided study populations into two groups according to the DWS, and Table 1 shows the characteristics of the study population with higher (>median) or lower (≤median) DWS. Patients with lower DWS were more obese and had a higher prevalence of hypertension and hyperlipidemia when compared with patients with higher DWS. The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blocker among anti-hypertensive medications was more common in patients with lower DWS. Systolic and diastolic BP was higher in patients with lower DWS.
Table 1 Baseline demographic characteristics
Echocardiographic parameters
Table 2 shows echocardiographic parameters of the study population. Figure 1 shows the relationship between DWS quartiles and echocardiographic LV volume and mass and systolic and diastolic indices. We compared differences of structural parameters and functional parameters in patients with normal LV diastolic function according to DWS.
Table 2 Baseline echocardiographic characteristics
Diastolic wall strain and LV structural parameters
When compared with patients with higher DWS, patients with lower DWS showed larger LV end-systolic dimension and end-systolic volume. In addition, LV mass index was much higher in patients with lower DWS. In terms of adverse LV remodeling, patients with lower DWS had more abnormal geometry. DWS was inversely correlated with LVESV (r = −0.168, p = 0.001) and LVMI (r = −0.383, p < 0.001). Scatterplots depicting the relationship between DWS and LVESV and LVMI are shown in Fig. 2a and b, respectively.
Diastolic wall strain and LV functional parameters
LV EF was slightly but significantly lower in patients with lower DWS (EF: 63.7 ± 5.3 vs. 61.3 ± 5.2 %, p < 0.001). In addition, E’ velocity also slightly but significantly lower (E’ 11.2 ± 2.2 vs. 10.5 ± 1.8 cm/s, p = 0.002) and E/E’ ratio was higher (E/E’ 7.1 ± 1.3 vs. 7.5 ± 1.5, p = 0.016) in patients with lower DWS among indices reflective of diastolic function. Figure 1c and d shows the relationship between DWS quartiles and EF and E/E’, respectively, and Fig. 2c shows scatterplots depicting the relationship between DWS and LV EF.
Pulse wave velocity and carotid ultrasound
Among the whole population, on 140 patients carotid ultrasound was performed and on 72 patients baPWV was performed, and the results are shown in Table 3. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. However, baPWV was higher in patients with low DWS (PWV 13.1 ± 17.1 vs. 14.2 ± 28.7 m/s, p = 0.064) with marginal statistical significance. Carotid IMT was also slightly increased in patients with lower DWS.
Table 3 Parameters of carotid ultrasonography and PWV
Correlations of continuous variables with DWS
As shown in Table 4, BMI, BP, LV ESD, ESV, LVMI, RWT, EF, DT, E’ velocity, E/E’ ratio and S’ velocity were significantly correlated with DWS, whereas age and LAVI did not. Echocardiographic findings showed that variables associated with LV geometry (LV ESD, ESV, LVMI, and RWT) were closely correlated with DWS. Of the tissue Doppler parameters, DT, E’ velocity, E/E’ ratio, and S’ velocity were correlated with DWS.
Table 4 Correlation of clinical and echocardiographic variables with DWS
Table 5 Multiple logistic regression analysis to predict factors associated with lower diastolic wall strain
Factors associated with lower diastolic wall strain
Higher BMI, elevated systolic and diastolic BP, increased LV ESV and LVMI, lower EF and E’, and higher E/E’ were parameters found related to lower DWS via univariate analysis. Among them, increased LVESV (OR 1.122, CI 1.071–1.166, p < 0.001) and LVMI (OR 1.091, CI 1.064–1.120, p < 0.001) and lower EF (OR 0.759, CI 0.696–0.829, p < 0.001) were independently associated with lower DWS in patients with normal LV diastolic function.