Login
Search
Search
0 Dates
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
0 Events
CPC 2018
CPC 2019
Curso de Atualização em Medicina Cardiovascular 2019
Reunião Anual Conjunta dos Grupos de Estudo de Cirurgia Cardíaca, Doenças Valvulares e Ecocardiografia da SPC
CPC 2020
CPC 2021
CPC 2022
CPC 2023
CPC 2024
CPC 2025
0 Topics
A. Basics
B. Imaging
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
D. Heart Failure
E. Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Acute Cardiac Care
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
G. Aortic Disease, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke
H. Interventional Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery
I. Hypertension
J. Preventive Cardiology
K. Cardiovascular Disease In Special Populations
L. Cardiovascular Pharmacology
M. Cardiovascular Nursing
N. E-Cardiology / Digital Health, Public Health, Health Economics, Research Methodology
O. Basic Science
P. Other
0 Themes
01. History of Cardiology
02. Clinical Skills
03. Imaging
04. Arrhythmias, General
05. Atrial Fibrillation
06. Supraventricular Tachycardia (non-AF)
07. Syncope and Bradycardia
08. Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD)
09. Device Therapy
10. Chronic Heart Failure
11. Acute Heart Failure
12. Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
13. Acute Coronary Syndromes
14. Acute Cardiac Care
15. Valvular Heart Disease
16. Infective Endocarditis
17. Myocardial Disease
18. Pericardial Disease
19. Tumors of the Heart
20. Congenital Heart Disease and Pediatric Cardiology
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
22. Aortic Disease
23. Peripheral Vascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
24. Stroke
25. Interventional Cardiology
26. Cardiovascular Surgery
27. Hypertension
28. Risk Factors and Prevention
29. Rehabilitation and Sports Cardiology
30. Cardiovascular Disease in Special Populations
31. Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy
32. Cardiovascular Nursing
33. e-Cardiology / Digital Health
34. Public Health and Health Economics
35. Research Methodology
36. Basic Science
37. Miscellanea
0 Resources
Abstract
Slides
Vídeo
Report
CLEAR FILTERS
New 2022 ESC/ERS definition of pulmonary hypertension. Can we rely on the same non-invasive echocardiographic parameters?
Session:
Posters (Sessão 3 - Écran 6) - Hipertensão pulmonar
Speaker:
Bárbara Teixeira
Congress:
CPC 2023
Topic:
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
Theme:
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
Subtheme:
21.7 Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure - Other
Session Type:
Pósters Electrónicos
FP Number:
---
Authors:
Bárbara Lacerda Teixeira; Francisco Barbas de Albuquerque; André Grazina; Luis Almeida Morais; João Reis; Ana Galrinho; Miguel Antunes; Ricardo Carvalheiro; Inês Ferreira Neves; Duarte Cacela; Ruben Ramos; António Fiarresga; Rui Cruz Ferreira
Abstract
<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong>Introduction: </strong><span style="color:black">The hemodynamic definition of pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been updated, with lowering of the mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) threshold from 25 to 20 mmHg according to the new 2022 ESC/ERS Guidelines. Although there is no single echocardiographic parameter that reliably informs about PH status, some of the echocardiographic parameters cut-offs remained the same, including a peak tricuspid regurgitation velocity (PTRV) > 2.8m/s.</span> <span style="color:black">The potential underdiagnosis of PH has not been evaluated.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the screening power of the standard echocardiographic parameters to detect PH according to the new guidelines and to establish new predictors.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong>Methods: </strong><span style="color:black">A prospective registry of</span> <span style="color:black">consecutive intermediate-high- and high-risk PE pts submitted to CDT in a single tertiary center was used. 3 months after the procedure, the patients were submitted to a right heart catheterization and echocardiogram to screen chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). According to new PH criteria, patients were divided in two groups, and echocardiographic parameters were analyzed regarding its predictive power. A ROC curve analysis was performed to evaluate optimal cut-offs of PTRV in predicting PH according the new guidelines.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong>Results: </strong><span style="color:black">17 pts (60% women, mean age 59 ± 16 years) were included. Among these, 7 pts (41,2%) were diagnosed with pre-capillary PH (mPAP > 20 mmHg, PVR > 2 WU, PAWP < 15 mmHg) by RHC at 3 months of follow-up. Among echocardiographic parameters, PTRV (p 0.015), presence of tricuspid regurgitation (0.034) and right ventricle-pulmonary artery (RV-PA) coupling (p 0.041) </span>were significantly different between groups (Fig 1 A)<span style="color:black">. Other parameters, such as right ventricle dilation (p 0.849), TAPSE (p 0.100), annular tricuspid s’ velocity (p 0.646), right ventricle outflow tract acceleration time (p 0.229) and the presence of pericardial effusion (p 0.849) did not show significant differences. Regarding the PTRV, a ROC curve analysis revealed an PTRV optimal cut-off of 2.6 m/s (pressure gradient 27mmHg) in our population (AUC 0.911, p 0.030, Sn 71.4%, Sp 100%). Compared to the conventional cut-off of 2.8 m/s (pressure gradient 31 mmHg) (p 0.470, Sn 28.6%, Sp 100%), the use of PTRV > 2.6 m/s allows to reduce false negatives without losing specificity (Fig 1 B, C and D).</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With the recent update in PH criteria, the use of the conventional PTRV cut-off leads to a significant underdiagnosis in our population. Lowering the PTRV threshold seems to increase sensitivity, <span style="color:black">without losing specificity. </span>Other standard echocardiographic parameters did not seem to predict accurately the presence of PH. </span></span></span></p>
Slides
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
Visit our site