Why the study?
The authors aimed to confirm whether 3DE-derived RVEF is a more robust predictor of adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes than conventional echocardiographic parameters.
Does 3D echocardiography-derived RVEF improve prediction of all-cause mortality and/or adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes compared to conventional RV indices in patients with cardiopulmonary diseases?
Does 3D echocardiography-derived RVEF improve prediction of all-cause mortality and/or adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes compared to conventional RV indices in patients with cardiopulmonary diseases?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
3D echocardiography-derived RVEF has superior prognostic value compared with conventional RV indices (TAPSE, FAC, FWLS) for predicting adverse outcomes in patients with cardiopulmonary diseases.
Aims We aimed to confirm that three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE)-derived right ventricular (RV) ejection fraction (EF) is a more robust predictor of adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes than the conventional echocardiographic parameters. Methods and Results We performed a meta-analysis of studies reporting the impact of unit change of RVEF, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), fractional area change (FAC), and free-wall longitudinal strain (FWLS) on clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality and/or adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes). Hazard ratios (HR) were rescaled by the within-study standard deviations (SD) to represent standardized changes. Within each study, we calculated the ratio of HRs related to 1 SD reduction in RVEF versus TAPSE, or FAC, or FWLS, to quantify the predictive value of RVEF relative to the other metrics. These ratios of HRs were pooled using random-effects models. Ten independent studies were identified as suitable, including data on 1,928 patients with various cardiopulmonary conditions. Overall, 1 SD reduction in RVEF was robustly associated with adverse outcomes (HR: 2.64 [95% CI: 2.18 to 3.20], p<0.001; heterogeneity: I 2 =65%, p=0.002). In studies reporting HRs for RVEF and TAPSE, FAC, or FWLS in the same cohort, RVEF had superior predictive value per SD reduction versus the other three parameters (vs. TAPSE, HR: 1.54 [95% CI: 1.04 to 2.28], p=0.031; vs. FAC, HR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.15 to 1.81], p=0.001; vs. FWLS, HR: 1.44 [95% CI: 1.07 to 1.95], p=0.018). Conclusion 3DE-derived RVEF has superior prognostic value compared with conventional RV indices, therefore, it might further refine the risk stratification of patients with cardiopulmonary diseases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sayour et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: