Difference in the respiratory variation between pulmonary venous and mitral inflow doppler velocities in patients with constrictive pericarditis with and without atrial fibrillation

• Published in: Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2001-06, Vol.37 (7), p.1936-1942
• Main Authors: Tabata, Tomotsugu, Kabbani, Samer S, Murray, R.Daniel, Thomas, James D, Abdalla, Ibrahim, Klein, Allan L
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Atrial Fibrillation - physiopathology; Biological and medical sciences; Blood Flow Velocity; Cardiology. Vascular system; Diseases of the pericardium; Female; Heart; Humans; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Mitral Valve - physiology; Pericarditis, Constrictive; Pulmonary Veins - physiology; Respiration; Space life sciences; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Pulsed
• ISSN: 0735-1097; 1558-3597
• DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(01)01252-9

OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to evaluate the difference in the respiratory change from expiration to inspiration (%E) between pulsed Doppler mitral inflow (MV) and pulmonary venous flow (PV) velocities in patients with constrictive pericarditis (CP) and to describe the influence of atrial fibrillation (AF). BACKGROUND The difference in %E between MV and PV velocities as well as the influence of AF on %E has not been well described. METHODS Pulsed-wave Doppler transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was performed with respiratory monitoring in 31 patients with CP and sinus rhythm (SR) and in 10 patients with CP and AF. The MV early (E) and late diastolic (A) velocities and their velocity time integral (VTI) as well as PV systolic (S) and diastolic (D) velocities and their VTI were measured. RESULTS Regardless of the cardiac rhythm: 1) The MV-E velocity and E-VTI as well as PV-D velocity and D-VTI significantly decreased from expiration to inspiration; 2) the %E in PV-D velocity (27% in SR and 35% in AF) and D-VTI (38% in SR and 45% in AF) was significantly greater than that in MV-E velocity (18% in SR and 15% in AF) and E-VTI (21% in SR and 19% in AF), respectively; 3) the PV S/D and S/D-VTI significantly increased from expiration to inspiration. CONCLUSIONS A significant respiratory variation was observed in both MV and PV velocities in CP, not only in patients with SR but also in those with AF. Moreover, the %E was greater in the PV velocities than it was in the MV velocities. Evaluation of the %E in the PV velocities using TEE can be a sensitive diagnostic strategy for evaluation of patients with CP, even in patients with AF.