Search

Background: Echocardiographic assessment of diastolic function is complex but can aid in the diagnosis of heart failure, particularly in patients with preserved ejection fraction. In 2016, the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) published an updated algorithm for the evaluation of diastolic function. The objective of our study was to assess its impact on diastolic function assessment in a real-world cohort of echo studies., Methods: We retrospectively identified 71,727 consecutive transthoracic echo studies performed at a tertiary care center between February 2010 and March 2016 in which diastolic function was reported based on the 2009 ASE Guidelines. We then programmed a software algorithm to assess diastolic function in these echo studies according to the 2016 ASE/EACVI Guidelines., Results: When diastolic function assessment based on the 2009 guidelines was compared to that using the 2016 guidelines, there were significant differences in proportion of studies classified as normal (23% vs. 32%) or indeterminate (43% vs. 36%) function, and mild (23% vs. 23%), moderate (10% vs. 8%), or severe (1% vs. 2%) diastolic dysfunction, with poor agreement between the two methods (Kappa 0.323, 95% CI 0.318-0.328). Furthermore, within the subgroup of studies with preserved ejection fraction and no evidence of myocardial disease, there was significant reclassification from mild diastolic dysfunction to normal diastolic function., Conclusion: The updated guidelines result in significant differences in diastolic function interpretation in the real world. Our findings have important implications for the identification of patients with or at risk for heart failure., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: The accurate measurement of cardiac output (CO) is required in patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH).While both the thermodilution (TDCO) and indirect Fick (IFCO) methods are commonly used, there is little data comparing them in patients with PH., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients evaluated at our center. All patients who had right heart catheterization (RHC) within 3 months of an echocardiogram, and CO assessment by both TDCO and IFCO methods were included. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess agreement between the two methods. We further evaluated their agreement in each sex, and within tertiles of age, BMI and TR severity. We investigated the correlation between each method of CO and objective parameters of right ventricular function on echocardiography., Results: In a cohort of 168 patients, the correlation between IFCO and TDCO was modest at (r = 0.61). On average, values for CO were lower with IFCO than with TDCO, by 0.62 L/min (95% CI -0.82, -0.40). This difference was greater for females: 0.86 L/min (95% CI -1.08, -0.63) and in the highest tertile of BMI: 0.97 L/min (95% CI -1.4, -0.55). Moderate and severe TR did not in general result in lower TDCO values. Echocardiographic parameters of right ventricular function were correlated more strongly with TDCO than with IFCO., Conclusion: In PH patients, IFCO was substantially lower than TDCO on average, suggesting that these two techniques cannot be used interchangeably. TDCO correlated more strongly with echocardiographic measures of RV function, suggesting that it may be preferred over IFCO., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)