Why the study?
Does pre-operative pulmonary flow systolic notch ratio predict in-hospital mortality and residual pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary endarterectomy in patients with CTEPH?
Does pre-operative pulmonary flow systolic notch ratio predict in-hospital mortality and residual pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary endarterectomy in patients with CTEPH?
Pre-operative echocardiographic assessment of the pulmonary flow systolic notch ratio can help predict in-hospital mortality and residual pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary endarterectomy in CTEPH patients.
NR may refine pre-PEA risk stratification in CTEPH; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
AIMS: To study whether pre-operative assessment, using echocardiography, of the timing of a particular feature in the pulmonary flow (pulmonary flow systolic notch) may predict in-hospital mortality and mid-term haemodynamic improvement after pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) for chronic thrombo-embolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty-eight of 61 consecutive CTEPH patients (aged 53 +/- 14 years; 36 women) who underwent PEA between June 2002 and June 2005 were studied. Clinical, haemodynamic, and echocardiographic variables were assessed pre-operatively and at 3 months post-PEA. Timing of the notch was expressed as notch ratio (NR). Pre-operatively, seven patients had no notch, 33 had NR < 1.0, and 18 had NR > 1.0. NR was associated with in-hospital mortality (P < 0.01). Moreover, multivariable analysis revealed that among pre-operative variables, NR was an independent predictor of residual-increased pulmonary artery systolic pressure (>40 mmHg) at 3 months post-PEA (P = 0.01). Receiver operator characteristic analysis established NR = 1.0 as optimal cutoff to distinguish patients at risk of such unfavourable outcomes, with NR > 1.0 conferring higher risk. CONCLUSION: NR is related with in-hospital mortality and residual pulmonary hypertension after PEA. NR > 1.0 is associated with a higher risk of such unfavourable outcomes. NR may be considered a determinant of eligibility for PEA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hardziyenka et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: