scholarly journals Correlation of left ventricular diastolic filling characteristics with right ventricular overload and pulmonary artery pressure in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

2002 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 318-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ehtisham Mahmud ◽  
Ajit Raisinghani ◽  
Alborz Hassankhani ◽  
H.Mehrdad Sadeghi ◽  
G.Monet Strachan ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (21) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidenori Moriyama ◽  
Takashi Kawakami ◽  
Masaharu Kataoka ◽  
Takahiro Hiraide ◽  
Mai Kimura ◽  
...  

Background Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is a prognostic factor for cardiovascular disease. However, its mechanism and pathophysiology remain unknown. We investigated RV function using RV‐specific 3‐dimensional (3D)‐speckle‐tracking echocardiography (STE) in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. We also assessed regional wall motion abnormalities in the RV and chronological changes during balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA). Methods and Results Twenty‐nine patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension who underwent BPA were enrolled and underwent right heart catheterization and echocardiography before, immediately after, and 6 months after BPA. Echocardiographic assessment of RV function included both 2‐dimensional‐STE and RV‐specific 3D‐STE. Before BPA, global area change ratio measured by 3D‐STE was significantly associated with invasively measured mean pulmonary artery pressure and pulmonary vascular resistance ( r =0.671 and r =0.700, respectively). Dividing the RV into the inlet, apex, and outlet, inlet area change ratio showed strong correlation with mean pulmonary artery pressure and pulmonary vascular resistance before BPA ( r =0.573 and r =0.666, respectively). Only outlet area change ratio was significantly correlated with troponin T values at 6 months after BPA ( r =0.470), and its improvement after BPA was delayed compared with the inlet and apex regions. Patients with poor outlet area change ratio were associated with a delay in RV reverse remodeling after treatment. Conclusions RV‐specific 3D‐STE analysis revealed that 3D RV parameters were novel useful indicators for assessing RV function and hemodynamics in pulmonary hypertension and that each regional RV portion presents a unique response to hemodynamic changes during treatment, implicating that evaluation of RV regional functions might lead to a new guide for treatment strategies.


2007 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 1334-1339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swaminatha V. Gurudevan ◽  
Philip J. Malouf ◽  
William R. Auger ◽  
Thomas J. Waltman ◽  
Michael Madani ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Poch ◽  
Victor Pretorius

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is defined as a mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥25 mm Hg and pulmonary artery wedge pressure ≤15 mm Hg in the presence of occlusive thrombi within the pulmonary arteries. Surgical pulmonary thromboendarterectomy (PTE) is considered the best treatment option for CTEPH.


Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4006-4006
Author(s):  
Franco Piovella ◽  
Andrea M. D’Armini ◽  
Marisa Barone ◽  
Vincenzo Emmi ◽  
Chiara Beltrametti ◽  
...  

Abstract Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a rare disease which results from obstruction of the major pulmonary arteries by incompletely resolved or organized pulmonary emboli which have become incorporated into the pulmonary artery wall, eventually causing an increase in pulmonary vascular resistances. Pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the treatment of choice. Careful pre- and post-operative management is essential for a successful outcome following PEA. In 1994, we started in Pavia a program in which members of a multidisciplinary team work in close interaction with the aim of increase experience in the challenging problems these patients present in the evaluative, surgical, and post-operative phases of their care. So far, 134 PEAs have been performed. Preoperatively, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class distribution was respectively 3-II, 56-III, and 75-IV; mean pulmonary artery pressure and pulmonary vascular resistances were 47 ± 13 mmHg and 1149 ± 535 dynes/sec/cm−5 respectively. The overall operative mortality has been 9.7% (in 2005 mortality rate was 4.5%). At present, 92% of the PEA patients are actively participating in the follow-up study. Follow-up visits are at 3 months after PEA, yearly for the following 5 years, and then at 7, 10, and 15 years postoperatively. Both early and late survivals were excellent. Survival rate at 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years were respectively of 89.5±2.7%, 87.3±3.0%, and 82.7±3.6%. Survival rates had not changed at 5, 7, and 10 years postoperative. Three months after PEA, 29 (58%) subjects were within NYHA class I, 18 (36%) in class II, and 3 (6%) in class III. At 1-year follow-up, 40 (80%) patients were within NYHA class I, 10 (20%) in class II. A statistically significant difference exists not only between the preoperative and the postoperative data (p <0.0001), but also between the functional status at 3 months and the other two postoperative controls (p <0.001). Table summarizes the results of hemodynamic tests collected at three months, one year and three years on the first 35 patients who completed the follow-up program. Hemodynamic data from 35 patients participating to the Pavia Pulmonary Endarterectomy Program with complete 3-year follow-up. CVP mPAP CO CI PVR PVRI CVP (mmHg) central venous pressure; mPAP (mmHg) mean pulmonary artery pressure; CO (L/min) cardiac output; CI (L/min/m2) cardiac index; PVR (dynes/sec/cm-5) pulmonary vascular resistances; PVRI (dynes/sec/cm-5/m2) pulmonary vascular resistances index; RV-EF (%) right ventricle ejection fraction. RV-EF A: Before-PEA 7±6 48±12 3.3±0.9 1.8±0.5 1125±412 2027±731 15±8 B:Before discharge 5±4 25±10 5.2±1.1 2.9±0.5 289±142 505±234 32±8 C: 3 months 2±2 24±11 5.1±1.4 2.8±0.6 231±198 542±271 32±7 D: 1 year 1±2 23±12 5.0±1.1 2.7±0.6 290±191 531±343 35±8 E: 3 years 2±2 24±12 4.9±1.1 2.6±0.5 317±226 579±393 34±8 p value A vs. B: nsA vs. C, D, and E: <0.0001B vs. C, D and E: <0.05 A vs. B, C, D and E: <0.0001 A vs. B, C, D and E: <0.0001 A vs. B, C, D and E: <0.0001 A vs. B, C, D and E: <0.0001 A vs. B, C, D and E: <0.0001 A vs. B, C, D and E:


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document