Why the study?
Previous studies reached conflicting conclusions regarding whether PCWP measurements should be assessed at end-expiration or as a global mean across respiratory cycles.
Observational
PCWP measurement choice may reclassify HFpEF cases; leaves open optimal thresholds for diagnosis and prognosis in observational data.
Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) is a key measure of left heart congestion used to establish or rule out the diagnosis of heart failure (HF). Diagnostic algorithms for HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) include or are validated based on rest and exercise PCWP measurements.1 However, previous studies have reached conflicting conclusions about whether PCWP measurements should be assessed at end-expiration (PCWPend-exp) or as a global mean across respiratory cycles (PCWPmean).2-4 In clinical practice heterogeneity in reporting mean vs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Campain et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Heart failure. PCWP measurement at end-expiration vs global mean was evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: