Key result
Doppler echocardiographic estimation of pulmonary vascular resistance using the TRV/VTI(RVOT) ratio correlated with invasive measurement (r=0.73, P<0.001) but showed poor agreement overall.
Why the study?
Does Doppler echocardiography accurately estimate pulmonary vascular resistance compared to right heart catheterization in patients with suspected or known pulmonary hypertension?
Observational (n=52)
Does Doppler echocardiography accurately estimate pulmonary vascular resistance compared to right heart catheterization in patients with suspected or known pulmonary hypertension?
Effect estimate: r = 0.73
p-value: p=<0.001
Doppler echocardiography using TRV/VTI(RVOT) correlates with invasive PVR but has poor agreement, and therefore cannot be recommended for estimating PVR in PH patients.
Echocardiographic PVR estimation shows poor agreement with catheterization and should not guide PH management; leaves open refined use in low-PVR subgroups pending prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Determination of pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) in patients with suspected or known pulmonary hypertension (PH) requires right heart catheterization. Our purpose was to use Doppler echocardiography to estimate PVR in patients with PH. METHODS: Patient population consisted of 52 patients (53 +/- 12 years; 35 females) who underwent Doppler echocardiography and right heart catheterization within 24 hours of each other. The ratio of peak tricuspid regurgitation velocity (TRV) and right ventricular outflow time-velocity integral (VTI(RVOT)) was measured via transthoracic echocardiography and correlated to invasively determined PVR. A linear regression equation was generated to determine PVR by echocardiography based upon the TRV/VTI(RVOT) ratio. PVR by echocardiography was compared to invasive PVR using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Significant correlation was demonstrated between TRV/VTI(RVOT) and PVR by catheterization (r = 0.73; P < 0.001). However, Bland-Altman analysis showed that agreement between PVR determined by echocardiography and invasive PVR was poor (bias = 0; standard deviation = 4.3 Wood units). In a subset of patients with invasive PVR < 8 Wood units (26 patients), correlation between TRV/VTI(RVOT) and invasive PVR was strong (r = 0.94; P < 0.001). In these patients, agreement between PVR by echocardiography and invasive PVR was satisfactory (bias = 0; standard deviation = 0.5 Wood units). There was no correlation between TRV/VTI(RVOT) and invasive PVR in patients with PVR > 8 Wood units (n = 26; r = 0.17). CONCLUSION: While TRV/VTI(RVOT) correlates significantly with PVR, using it to estimate PVR in a PH patient population cannot be recommended.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rajagopalan et al. (2008) conducted an observational in Suspected or known pulmonary hypertension (n=52). Doppler echocardiography (TRV/VTI(RVOT) ratio) vs. Right heart catheterization (invasive PVR) was evaluated on Correlation and agreement between echocardiographic and invasive pulmonary vascular resistance (r = 0.73, p=<0.001). Doppler echocardiographic estimation of pulmonary vascular resistance using the TRV/VTI(RVOT) ratio correlated with invasive measurement (r=0.73, P<0.001) but showed poor agreement overall.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: