Contraction Patterns of Post-Fontan Single Right Ventricle Versus Normal Left and Right Ventricles in Children: Insights From Principal Strain Analysis

Background: Principal strain (PS) analysis quantifies three-dimensional myocardial deformation using three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography. It defines both the amplitude and direction of the principal myocardial contraction, expressed as PS, and a perpendicular secondary strain of lower intensity. The aims of this study were to apply PS analysis to describe the contractile pattern in the single right ventricle (SRV) functioning as a systemic chamber in hypoplastic left heart syndrome, compared with the normal left ventricle (LV) and right ventricle (RV), and to compare SRV function using conventional echocardiographic evaluations.

Methods: Fifty-four post-Fontan patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome and age-matched control subjects (normal LV, n = 64; normal RV, n = 48) underwent computation of PS lines, ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume indexed to body surface area, PS, secondary strain, circumferential strain, and longitudinal strain. The PS lines were compared between groups. Linear regressions with coefficient determination (R²) of strains, fractional area change, and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion with EF and end-diastolic volume index were assessed in SRV. Additionally, the hypoplastic left heart syndrome cohort was equally divided into two groups with higher and lower EFs, followed by comparison of all parameters.

Results: The pattern of PS lines demonstrated a left-handed direction in the anterior free wall, a right-handed direction in the posterior free wall, and a circumferential direction in the medial wall in SRV. In contrast, in the normal LV, the principal contraction is in the circumferential direction, whereas in the normal RV, it is predominantly longitudinal. The R² values for PS, secondary strain, and circumferential strain on EF were high (0.88, 0.72, and 0.90, respectively), whereas the R² value for longitudinal strain was comparable with that for fractional area change (0.56 and 0.55). All parameters were independent of end-diastolic volume index. PS lines in the higher EF group showed a more circumferential orientation than in the lower EF group in SRV.

Conclusion: PS analysis provides a unique functional map of SRV contraction. This map differs from corresponding maps of the normal LV and RV. This may be helpful in understanding the mechanisms of SRV function, although future longitudinal studies are needed.