Key result
Comprehensive evaluation of right ventricular viability and recovery potential is increasingly feasible with newer imaging modalities and has important clinical implications for right heart diseases.
Emphasizes the critical need to evaluate right ventricular recovery potential using advanced imaging to improve outcomes in right-sided heart diseases.
May guide RV imaging selection in right heart disease; leaves open prospective outcome trials before practice change.
Historically, the right ventricle (RV) has received less attention than the left probably because morbidity and mortality associated with left ventricular disease is clinically more apparent. Right heart disease, in contrast, tends to have a more prolonged and, in the early stages, often subclinical course. Furthermore, the left ventricle is easier to image, model and quantify, so that research has been successful at amassing a great deal of clinically useful information about the left heart while the right heart still remains, in many ways, a mystery. In this perspective, the authors sought to explore the topic of RV recovery potential that has important clinical implications in the evaluation and treatment of advanced right-sided valvular heart disease, congenital heart disease, pulmonary arterial disease and even lung disease which impacts the RV. We see a clear need for a better understanding of RV viability given our increasing appreciation that RV failure is a significant contributor to morbidity and mortality in many disease states and the fact that newer imaging modalities and innovative changes to older modalities make more comprehensive evaluation of the RV feasible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Addetia et al. (2014) conducted a review in Right ventricular disease. Comprehensive evaluation of right ventricular viability and recovery potential is increasingly feasible with newer imaging modalities and has important clinical implications for right heart diseases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: