Why the study?
Do common clinical measures of left ventricular function (EF, ETT, symptoms) correlate with each other and with invasively measured LV peak dP/dt in patients with HFrEF?
Observational (n=56)
Yes
Do common clinical measures of left ventricular function (EF, ETT, symptoms) correlate with each other and with invasively measured LV peak dP/dt in patients with HFrEF?
Common clinical measures of left ventricular function (EF, exercise capacity, and symptoms) correlate poorly with each other and with invasive hemodynamic assessments, suggesting they should be used complementarily rather than interchangeably.
Methods commonly used clinically to assess cardiac function in patients with heart failure include ejection fraction (EF), exercise treadmill testing (ETT), and symptom evaluation. Although these approaches are useful in evaluating patients with heart failure, there are at times substantial mismatches between individual assessments. For example, ETT results are often discordant with EF, and patients with minimal symptoms sometimes have surprisingly low EFs. To better define the relationship of these methods of assessment, we studied 56 patients with heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF) who underwent measurement of ETT duration, EF by echocardiography, quantitative symptom evaluation, and LV peak dP/dt (rate of left ventricular pressure development and decline, measured invasively). Correlations were determined among these four tests in order to assess the relationship of EF, ETT, and symptoms against LV peak dP/dt. In addition, we sought to determine whether EF, ETT, and symptoms correlated with each other. Overall, correlations were poor. Only 15 of 63 total correlations (24%) were significant (p < 0.05). EF correlated most closely with LV peak -dP/dt. Linear regression analysis indicated that EF, ETT, and symptoms taken together predicted LV peak dP/dt better than any one measure alone. We conclude that clinical tests used to assess LV function in patients with HFrEF may not be as accurate or correlate as well as expected. All three clinical measures considered together may be the best representation of cardiac function in HFrEF patients currently available.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pandey et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (n=56). Clinical evaluation tests (Ejection Fraction, Exercise Treadmill Testing, Symptom Assessment) vs. LV peak dP/dt (invasive measurement) was evaluated on Correlation between Ejection Fraction and LV peak +dP/dt (r = 0.40, p=0.004).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: