Comparison of 2DSTE and 3DSTE.

<p>Data are mean difference±SD and 95% limit of agreement (LOA).</p

Characteristics of SABRE participants split by gender and feasibility of LV peak rotation measures.

<p>Data are mean±SD for numerical data and n (%) for categorical data.</p>*<p> = p<0.05.</p>**<p> = p<0.01 compared with individuals that had no rotation measurements by post hoc test following ANOVA. BP, blood pressure; CAD coronary artery disease.</p

Speckle tracking echocardiography examples.

<p><b>A. Qlab 7.0</b>, this is an example of speckle tracking at the LV base level. A single layer of tracking points is placed on either the endocardium or epicardium ∼60° away from each other. <b>B. Qlab 8.1,</b> an example of the LV short axis at the apex level. A mesh tracks all layers of the myocardium simultaneously.</p

Qlab 7.0 and 8.1 Intra-observer reproducibility.

<p>Reproducibility of endocardial and epicardial peak twist, rotation and time to peak rotation measured at the left ventricle apex and the base. Data are average difference ±SDdiff (ICC, concordance correlation coefficient).</p

Baseline characteristics of participants in the reproducibility studies.

<p>Data are mean±SD or n (%).</p

Qlab 7.0 Inter-observer reproducibility.

<p>Reproducibility data are average difference±SDdiff (ICC); t_max, time to left ventricular peak systolic rotation; ICC, concordance correlation coefficient.</p

Qlab 7.0 and 8.1 Intra-observer agreement.

<p>Bland & Altman plots a) Qlab 7.0 apex peak rotation at the endocardium b) Qlab 7.0 base peak rotation at the endocardium c) Qlab 7.0 apex peak rotation at the epicardium d) Qlab 7.0 base peak rotation at the epicardium. e) Qlab 8.0 apex peak rotation at the endocardium f) Qlab 8.1 base peak rotation at the endocardium g) Qlab 8.1 apex peak rotation at the epicardium h) Qlab 8.1 base peak rotation at the epicardium.</p