Key result
Respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity decreased but remained present after full pericardial drainage (13.9%, P=0.0017), indicating it is not predictive of hemodynamic compromise.
Why the study?
Does respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity predict hemodynamic compromise in patients with pericardial effusion?
Observational (n=11)
Does respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity predict hemodynamic compromise in patients with pericardial effusion?
The presence and magnitude of respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity is not predictive of hemodynamic compromise in patients with pericardial effusion.
Caution against relying on mitral flow variation to predict tamponade; leaves open its diagnostic value in larger studies.
It has been suggested that the presence of increased respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity (RVIMFV) in patients with pericardial effusion (PE) represents significant hemodynamic compromise regardless of the amount of PE or 2D-echo findings. Recent experimental data do not, however, support this aspect. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of RVIMFV to clinical, hemodynamic, and 2D-echo findings in patients with PE and cardiac tamponade (CT). Therefore, 11 patients with PE and CT were studied with right-heart, pericardial, and arterial pressure measurements in conjunction with 2D and Doppler echocardiography during three stages of gradually decreasing PE, ie, (1) before any PE drainage, (2) after partial PE drainage, and (3) after full drainage. A significant RVIMFV was noted during all three stages of our study. It was maximal at the early stage [respiratory difference in mitral flow velocity (delta MFV): 16.8 +/- 6.3 cm/sec, 24.1%, P = 0.0000026] coinciding with pulsus paradoxus, high pericardial pressure, and diastolic right heart collapse, and it decreased slightly after partial drainage when all signs of CT receded (delta MFV: 13.7 +/- 9.7 cm/sec, 18%, P = 0.00043). However, there was still some RVIMFV (delta MFV: 8.7 +/- 7.6 cm/sec, 13.9%, P = 0.0017) after full pericardial drainage. It is concluded that the presence and the magnitude of RVIMFV is not predictive of hemodynamic compromise in patients with PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simeonidou et al. (1994) conducted an observational in Pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade (n=11). Pericardial effusion drainage vs. Baseline (before drainage) was evaluated on Respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity (RVIMFV). Respiratory variation in mitral flow velocity decreased but remained present after full pericardial drainage (13.9%, P=0.0017), indicating it is not predictive of hemodynamic compromise.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: