Imaging right ventricular function to predict outcome in pulmonary arterial hypertension

• Published in: International journal of cardiology 2016-09, Vol.218, p.206-211
• Main Authors: Brewis, Melanie J, Bellofiore, Alessandro, Vanderpool, Rebecca R, Chesler, Naomi C, Johnson, Martin K, Naeije, Robert, Peacock, Andrew J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Cardiovascular; Female; Heart Ventricles - physiopathology; Humans; Hypertension, Pulmonary - mortality; Hypertension, Pulmonary - physiopathology; Male; Middle Aged; Multivariate Analysis; Predictive Value of Tests; Pressure–volume relationship; Prognosis; Pulmonary Artery - physiopathology; Pulmonary hypertension; Right ventricular dysfunction; Ventricular Function, Right
• ISSN: 0167-5273; 1874-1754
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.05.015

Abstract Background Right ventricular (RV) function is a major determinant of outcome in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). However, uncertainty persists about the optimal method of evaluation. Methods We measured RV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes (ESV and EDV) using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and RV pressures during right heart catheterization in 140 incident PAH patients and 22 controls. A maximum RV pressure (Pmax) was calculated from the nonlinear extrapolations of early and late systolic portions of the RV pressure curve. The gold standard measure of RV function adaptation to afterload, or RV-arterial coupling (Ees/Ea) was estimated by the stroke volume (SV)/ESV ratio (volume method) or as Pmax/mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) minus 1 (pressure method) (n = 84). RV function was also assessed by ejection fraction (EF), right atrial pressure (RAP) and SV. Results Higher Ea and RAP, and lower compliance, SV and EF predicted outcome at univariate analysis. Ees/Ea estimated by the pressure method did not predict outcome but Ees/Ea estimated by the volume method (SV/ESV) did. At multivariate analysis, only SV/ESV and EF were independent predictors of outcome. Survival was poorer in patients with a fall in EF or SV/ESV during follow up (n = 44, p = 0.008). Conclusion RV function to predict outcome in PAH is best evaluated by imaging derived SV/ESV or EF. In this study, there was no added value of invasive measurements or simplified pressure-derived estimates of RV-arterial coupling.