Key result
Axial RV/LV ratio >0.9 predicts 30-day mortality as accurately as the reformatted four-chamber ratio.
Why the study?
The comparative accuracy of axial versus reformatted four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratios on pulmonary CT angiography for predicting mortality after acute PE was unclear.
Does the axial RV/LV diameter ratio predict 30-day mortality after acute PE as accurately as the reformatted four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratio?
Cohort (n=674)
Does the axial RV/LV diameter ratio predict 30-day mortality after acute PE as accurately as the reformatted four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratio?
Effect estimate: HR 2.13 vs HR 1.95 (95% CI 1.29-3.51 vs 1.22-3.14)
p-value: p=0.74
The standard axial RV/LV diameter ratio on pulmonary CT angiography is as accurate as the reformatted four-chamber view for predicting 30-day mortality in patients with acute pulmonary embolism, simplifying risk stratification.
Axial RV/LV ratio matches four-chamber accuracy for 30-day mortality prediction in acute PE; supports simplified axial assessment but leaves prospective validation open.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to retrospectively compare right ventricular-to-left ventricular (RV/LV) diameter ratios measured on the standard axial view versus the reformatted four-chamber view as predictors of mortality after acute pulmonary embolism (PE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six hundred seventy-four consecutive patients (mean age, 58 years; 372 women) with a diagnosis of acute PE on pulmonary CT angiography were considered. The axial and reformatted four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratios were compared as predictors of 30-day all-cause and PE-related mortality. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients (14%) died within 30 days; 39 deaths were PE related. There was no significant difference in the univariate hazard ratios (HRs) of axial and four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratios greater than 0.9 for both all-cause (HR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.29-3.51] vs HR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.22-3.14]; p = 0.74) and PE-related (HR, 19.6 [95% CI, 2.70-143] vs HR, 21.8 [95% CI, 2.99-158]; p = 1.0) mortality. Axial and four-chamber multivariate HRs accounting for potential confounders such as age and cancer were also similar for all-cause (HR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.07-2.99] vs HR, 1.54 [95% CI, 0.95-2.49]; p = 0.62) and PE-related (HR, 16.3 [95% CI, 2.22-119] vs HR, 17.7 [95% CI, 2.43-130]; p = 1.0) mortality. There was no significant difference in sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, or positive predictive value. Axial and four-chamber measurements were well correlated (correlation coefficient, 0.857), and there was no significant difference in overall accuracy for predicting all-cause (area under the curve [AUC], 0.582 vs 0.577; p = 0.72) and PE-related (AUC, 0.743 vs 0.744; p = 1.0) mortality. CONCLUSION: The axial RV/LV diameter ratio is no less accurate than the reformatted four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratio for predicting 30-day mortality after PE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lu et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Acute pulmonary embolism (n=674). Axial RV/LV diameter ratio >0.9 vs. Reformatted four-chamber RV/LV diameter ratio >0.9 was evaluated on 30-day all-cause mortality (HR 2.13 vs HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.29-3.51 vs 1.22-3.14, p=0.74). The axial RV/LV diameter ratio >0.9 was no less accurate than the reformatted four-chamber ratio for predicting 30-day all-cause mortality (HR 2.13 vs 1.95; p=0.74).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: