Why the study?
The Valsalva manoeuvre is standard for diagnosing LVOT obstruction in HOCM and PFO, but inconsistent execution can limit diagnostic accuracy.
Does the party balloon inflation manoeuvre (PBIM) improve haemodynamic provocation compared to the Valsalva manoeuvre in healthy volunteers?
Does the party balloon inflation manoeuvre (PBIM) improve haemodynamic provocation compared to the Valsalva manoeuvre in healthy volunteers?
The party balloon inflation manoeuvre provides greater haemodynamic provocation than the standard Valsalva manoeuvre in healthy volunteers, suggesting potential utility for diagnosing HOCM and PFO.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PBIM may provide stronger provocation than VM in volunteers; hypothesis-generating for diagnostic use in HOCM or PFO.
Aims Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction is a key feature of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM), whereas patent foramen ovale (PFO) obstruction is associated with cryptogenic stroke and other conditions. The Valsalva manoeuvre (VM) is a standard technique for diagnosing these conditions; however, its inconsistent execution can limit diagnostic accuracy. We aimed to evaluate the party balloon inflation manoeuvre (PBIM) as an alternative to VM for diagnosing HOCM and PFO by comparing their haemodynamic effects. Methods and results In this single-centre pilot study, we conducted in vitro and in vivo experiments. The pressure characteristics of the two balloon sizes were measured in the in vitro experiment. In the in vivo study, we assessed haemodynamic changes in 25 healthy volunteers using transthoracic echocardiography. The endpoints included the left ventricular diastolic dimension (LVDd) for HOCM and the right ventricular inflow velocity-time integral (RV inflow-VTI) for PFO. PBIM significantly reduced LVDd compared with VM, indicating greater LVOT obstruction provocation (P < 0.01). The RV inflow-VTI was also significantly higher with PBIM, suggesting increased venous return and enhanced right-to-left shunting (P < 0.01). The heart rate and perceived exertion scores were higher with the PBIM, reflecting a greater physiological load. Conclusion PBIM is a simple, effective, and reliable alternative to VM for diagnosing HOCM and PFO, offering clear visual feedback and improved diagnostic performance. Further research in patient populations is required to confirm these findings. Trial registration number: UMIN000054423. (https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr.cgi?function=brows&action=brows&recptno=R000062098&type=summary&language=J).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kito et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: