Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure

Abstract Aims The clinical reliability of echocardiographic surrogate markers of left ventricular filling pressures (LVFPs) across different cardiovascular pathologies remains unanswered. The main objective was to evaluate the evidence of how effectively different echocardiographic indices estimate...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rachel Jones, Frances Varian, Samer Alabed, Paul Morris, Alexander Rothman, Andrew J. Swift, Nigel Lewis, Andreas Kyriacou, James M. Wild, Abdallah Al‐Mohammad, Liang Zhong, Amardeep Dastidar, Robert F. Storey, Peter P. Swoboda, Jeroen J. Bax, Pankaj Garg
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2021-02-01
Series:ESC Heart Failure
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13119
id doaj-8e5e5689c13e48bdbb1f90fe8e1ed84a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8e5e5689c13e48bdbb1f90fe8e1ed84a2021-03-31T03:15:45ZengWileyESC Heart Failure2055-58222021-02-018156657610.1002/ehf2.13119Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressureRachel Jones0Frances Varian1Samer Alabed2Paul Morris3Alexander Rothman4Andrew J. Swift5Nigel Lewis6Andreas Kyriacou7James M. Wild8Abdallah Al‐Mohammad9Liang Zhong10Amardeep Dastidar11Robert F. Storey12Peter P. Swoboda13Jeroen J. Bax14Pankaj Garg15Department of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Cardiology Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Sheffield UKDepartment of Cardiology Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Sheffield UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKNational Heart Research Institute Singapore National Heart Centre Singapore SingaporeBristol Heart Institute Bristol UKDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKLeeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine University of Leeds Leeds UKCardiology Directorate Leiden University Medical Centre Leiden The NetherlandsDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease The University of Sheffield Sheffield S10 2RX UKAbstract Aims The clinical reliability of echocardiographic surrogate markers of left ventricular filling pressures (LVFPs) across different cardiovascular pathologies remains unanswered. The main objective was to evaluate the evidence of how effectively different echocardiographic indices estimate true LVFP. Methods and results Design: this is a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Data source: Scopus, PubMed and Embase. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies were those that used echocardiography to predict or estimate pulmonary capillary wedge pressure or left ventricular end‐diastolic pressures. Twenty‐seven studies met criteria. Only eight studies (30%) reported both correlation coefficient and bias between non‐invasive and invasively measured LVFPs. The majority of studies (74%) recorded invasive pulmonary capillary wedge pressure as a surrogate for left ventricular end‐diastolic pressures. The pooled correlation coefficient overall was r = 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63–0.75, P < 0.01]. Evaluation by cohort demonstrated varying association: heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (11 studies, n = 575, r = 0.59, 95% CI 0.53–0.64) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (8 studies, n = 381, r = 0.67, 95% CI 0.61–0.72). Conclusions Echocardiographic indices show moderate pooled association to invasively measured LVFP; however, this varies widely with disease state. In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, no single echocardiography‐based metric offers a reliable estimate. In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, mitral inflow‐derived indices (E/e′, E/A, E/Vp, and EDcT) have reasonable clinical applicability. While an integrated approach of several echocardiographic metrics provides the most promise for estimating LVFP reliably, such strategies need further validation in larger, patient‐specific studies.https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13119Left ventricular end‐diastolic pressureEchocardiographyInvasive heart catheterization
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Rachel Jones
Frances Varian
Samer Alabed
Paul Morris
Alexander Rothman
Andrew J. Swift
Nigel Lewis
Andreas Kyriacou
James M. Wild
Abdallah Al‐Mohammad
Liang Zhong
Amardeep Dastidar
Robert F. Storey
Peter P. Swoboda
Jeroen J. Bax
Pankaj Garg
spellingShingle Rachel Jones
Frances Varian
Samer Alabed
Paul Morris
Alexander Rothman
Andrew J. Swift
Nigel Lewis
Andreas Kyriacou
James M. Wild
Abdallah Al‐Mohammad
Liang Zhong
Amardeep Dastidar
Robert F. Storey
Peter P. Swoboda
Jeroen J. Bax
Pankaj Garg
Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
ESC Heart Failure
Left ventricular end‐diastolic pressure
Echocardiography
Invasive heart catheterization
author_facet Rachel Jones
Frances Varian
Samer Alabed
Paul Morris
Alexander Rothman
Andrew J. Swift
Nigel Lewis
Andreas Kyriacou
James M. Wild
Abdallah Al‐Mohammad
Liang Zhong
Amardeep Dastidar
Robert F. Storey
Peter P. Swoboda
Jeroen J. Bax
Pankaj Garg
author_sort Rachel Jones
title Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
title_short Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
title_full Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
title_fullStr Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
title_full_unstemmed Meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
title_sort meta‐analysis of echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular filling pressure
publisher Wiley
series ESC Heart Failure
issn 2055-5822
publishDate 2021-02-01
description Abstract Aims The clinical reliability of echocardiographic surrogate markers of left ventricular filling pressures (LVFPs) across different cardiovascular pathologies remains unanswered. The main objective was to evaluate the evidence of how effectively different echocardiographic indices estimate true LVFP. Methods and results Design: this is a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Data source: Scopus, PubMed and Embase. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies were those that used echocardiography to predict or estimate pulmonary capillary wedge pressure or left ventricular end‐diastolic pressures. Twenty‐seven studies met criteria. Only eight studies (30%) reported both correlation coefficient and bias between non‐invasive and invasively measured LVFPs. The majority of studies (74%) recorded invasive pulmonary capillary wedge pressure as a surrogate for left ventricular end‐diastolic pressures. The pooled correlation coefficient overall was r = 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63–0.75, P < 0.01]. Evaluation by cohort demonstrated varying association: heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (11 studies, n = 575, r = 0.59, 95% CI 0.53–0.64) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (8 studies, n = 381, r = 0.67, 95% CI 0.61–0.72). Conclusions Echocardiographic indices show moderate pooled association to invasively measured LVFP; however, this varies widely with disease state. In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, no single echocardiography‐based metric offers a reliable estimate. In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, mitral inflow‐derived indices (E/e′, E/A, E/Vp, and EDcT) have reasonable clinical applicability. While an integrated approach of several echocardiographic metrics provides the most promise for estimating LVFP reliably, such strategies need further validation in larger, patient‐specific studies.
topic Left ventricular end‐diastolic pressure
Echocardiography
Invasive heart catheterization
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13119
work_keys_str_mv AT racheljones metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT francesvarian metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT sameralabed metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT paulmorris metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT alexanderrothman metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT andrewjswift metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT nigellewis metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT andreaskyriacou metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT jamesmwild metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT abdallahalmohammad metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT liangzhong metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT amardeepdastidar metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT robertfstorey metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT peterpswoboda metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT jeroenjbax metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
AT pankajgarg metaanalysisofechocardiographicquantificationofleftventricularfillingpressure
_version_ 1724178637880557568