Uemura Kazunori, Inagaki Masashi, Zheng Can, Li Meihua, Kawada Toru, Sugimachi Masaru
Department of Cardiovascular Dynamics, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, 5-7-1 Fujishirodai, Suita, 565-8565, Japan,
Heart Vessels. 2015 Jul;30(4):516-26. doi: 10.1007/s00380-014-0525-4. Epub 2014 May 31.
Assessing left ventricular (LV) filling pressure (pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, PCWP) is an important aspect in the care of patients with heart failure (HF). Physicians rely on right ventricular (RV) filling pressures such as central venous pressure (CVP) to predict PCWP, assuming concordance between CVP and PCWP. However, the use of this method is limited because discordance between CVP and PCWP is observed. We hypothesized that PCWP can be reliably predicted by CVP corrected by the relationship between RV and LV function, provided by the ratio of tissue Doppler peak systolic velocity of tricuspid annulus (S(T)) to that of mitral annulus (S(M)) (corrected CVP:CVP·S(T)/S(M)). In 16 anesthetized closed-chest dogs, S T and S M were measured by transthoracic tissue Doppler echocardiography. PCWP was varied over a wide range (1.8-40.0 mmHg) under normal condition and various types of acute and chronic HF. A significantly stronger linear correlation was observed between CVP·S(T)/S(M) and PCWP (R2 = 0.78) than between CVP and PCWP (R2 = 0.22) (P < 0.01). Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated that CVP·S(T)/S(M) >10.5 mmHg predicted PCWP >18 mmHg with 85% sensitivity and 88% specificity. Area under ROC curve for CVP·S T/S M to predict PCWP >18 mmHg was 0.93, which was significantly larger than that for CVP (0.66) (P < 0.01). Peripheral venous pressure (PVP) corrected by S T/S M (PVP·S(T)/S(M) also predicted PCWP reasonably well, suggesting that PVP·S(T)/S (M) may be a minimally invasive alternative to CVP·S(T)/S(M) In conclusion, our technique is potentially useful for the reliable prediction of PCWP in HF patients.
评估左心室(LV)充盈压(肺毛细血管楔压,PCWP)是心力衰竭(HF)患者护理中的一个重要方面。医生依靠右心室(RV)充盈压,如中心静脉压(CVP)来预测PCWP,假定CVP和PCWP之间具有一致性。然而,由于观察到CVP和PCWP之间存在不一致,这种方法的应用受到限制。我们假设,通过三尖瓣环组织多普勒峰值收缩速度(S(T))与二尖瓣环组织多普勒峰值收缩速度(S(M))之比所反映的RV与LV功能关系校正后的CVP(校正CVP:CVP·S(T)/S(M))能够可靠地预测PCWP。在16只麻醉开胸犬中,通过经胸组织多普勒超声心动图测量S(T)和S(M)。在正常状态以及各种急慢性HF情况下,将PCWP在较宽范围内(1.8 - 40.0 mmHg)进行改变。与CVP和PCWP之间的相关性(R2 = 0.22)相比,CVP·S(T)/S(M)与PCWP之间观察到显著更强的线性相关性(R2 = 0.78)(P < 0.01)。受试者工作特征(ROC)分析表明,CVP·S(T)/S(M) >10.5 mmHg预测PCWP >18 mmHg的敏感性为85%,特异性为88%。CVP·S(T)/S(M)预测PCWP >18 mmHg的ROC曲线下面积为0.93,显著大于CVP的ROC曲线下面积(0.66)(P < 0.01)。经S(T)/S(M)校正的外周静脉压(PVP)(PVP·S(T)/S(M))对PCWP的预测也相当不错,这表明PVP·S(T)/S(M)可能是CVP·S(T)/S(M)的一种微创替代方法。总之,我们的技术对于可靠预测HF患者的PCWP可能具有实用价值。