['Two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography (2DSTE) has been used widely in research, but rarely in clinical practice because data acquisition and analysis are time-consuming. By reducing the acquisition and analysis time, 3-dimensional STE may improve clinical impact. We investigated the feasibility of 3DSTE myocardial deformation, with comparison to 2DSTE.', 'Transthoracic 3DSTE and 2DSTE were performed in 230 adults (138 men, 51 ± 14 years, and 142 hypertension, 10 heart failure and 78 normotensive subjects). The variables of LV deformation were analyzed using EchoPAC software.', 'The 3D LV longitudinal (LS) analysis was feasible in 84.9% of the study subjects, which was lower than the 2D analysis (97.2%). The success rates for circumferential strain (CS) and radial strain (RS) were similar between the 2D and 3D techniques. All magnitude of strains measured by 2DSTE and 3DSTE were significantly correlated. The magnitude of 3D LS and CS was lower, but the 3D RS is higher than that of 2DSTE (-18.5 ± 2.8 vs. -21.2 ± 3.5; 20.8 ± 4.1 vs. 21.7; and 50.0 ± 11.2 vs. 37.7 ± 12.6, respectively). Strains measured by 3DSTE exhibited stronger correlation with LV ejection fraction (EF) than that by 2DSTE. In inter- and intra-observer reproducibility for 3D LS, CS, RS and AS were acceptable. The mean time of analysis for LV volume, EF and strains was 116s by 3DSTE, which was significantly shorter than that by 2DSTE (5 min, P<0.0001).'] Is three-dimensional speckle strain echocardiography more accurate and efficient than 2D strain in the evaluation of left ventricular function?