Global myocardial strain assessment by different imaging modalities to predict outcomes after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A systematic review

Table 1 Advantages and disadvantages of speckle-tracking echocardiography vs cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

Advantages	Disadvantages
Cheaper than CMR scan	Cannot acquire SAX views easily - needed to calculate circumferential strain
Can be performed at the bedside	Cannot routinely obtain stress imaging as part of acquisition protocol
Short duration: 10-20 min for STE vs 45-60 min for CMR	Not possible to ascertain infarct size, oedema, microvascular obstruction
Significant contraindications for CMR - for example, pacemaker/ICD, brain aneurysmal clip, claustrophobia, eGFR < 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 - vs almost none for STE	CMR has much higher spatial resolution than STE. Consequently, a greater percentage of images are analysable by CMR than STE

CMR: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; eGFR: Estimated glomerular filtration rate; ICD: Insertable cardioverter defibrillator; SAX: Short axis; STE: Speckle-tracking echocardiography.