MEDiastinal Irradiation and CArdio-Toxic Effects (MEDICATE): Exploring the Relationship between Cardiac Irradiation and High Sensitivity Troponins.

AIMS: Radiation-induced heart disease is a late effect of cardiac irradiation and has been shown in patients with lymphoma and thoracic cancers. There is no established measurement tool to detect acute cardiac damage. However, high sensitivity troponin I and T (HsTnI and HsTnT) and echocardiograms have shown promise in some studies. A pilot trial was conducted to characterise whether these instruments may detect subclinical radiotherapy-induced cardiac damage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients received high cardiac doses defined by either at least 30 Gy to 5% of cardiac volume or a mean dose of 4 Gy. HsTnI and HsTnT were measured before radiotherapy and after 2 and 4 weeks of radiotherapy; three-dimensional echocardiograms were completed before and 1 year after radiotherapy. RESULTS: Of 19 patients, the median 'mean left ventricular dose' was 3.1 Gy and the 'mean cardiac dose' was 8.6 Gy. Significant positive associations between HsTnI and HsTnT were observed at all time points, but there was no significant association with cardiac dose. The mean left ventricular dose and the maximum left ventricular dose were, however, associated with a decrease in ejection fraction (P = 0.054, 0.043) as well as an increase in left ventricular strain (P = 0.058). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that HsTnI and HsTnT are intimately related, but detection of acute cardiac damage was not shown, potentially due to limitations of these markers or low radiotherapy doses using conformal techniques. Our results also suggest subacute damage at 1 year may depend on the dose to the left ventricle. Further studies are needed, as identification of early damage could facilitate the ability to closely monitor and intervene in patients at risk for radiation-induced heart disease.

Echocardiography in the assessment of heart failure.

Echocardiography with Doppler is the most commonly performed non-invasive cardiac imaging test in patients with suspected or documented heart failure (HF), and plays a pivotal role in their assessment and management. Two- and three-dimensional echocardiography are commonly used to quantitatively assess cardiac volumes, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), stroke volume and cardiac output. Resting and stress echocardiography the latter with exercise or pharmacologic stress play a fundamental role in distinguishing ischemic from non-ischemic etiology of HF and in demonstrating myocardial viability. Echocar-diography with comprehensive spectral and color Doppler can accurately determine if valve disease plays a primary or secondary role in HF etiology. Diastolic heart failure (DHF) also termed HF with a preserved LVEF is readily identified by echocardiography with Doppler, and can accurately estimated LV filling pressures and pulmonary artery pressures. The right ventricle can also be readily assessed by echocardiography, with newer techniques such as three-dimensional, tissue Doppler and speckle strain imaging aiding its assessment. Echocardiography is also commonly used to identify candidates for implantable cardiac defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapies. Three-dimensional echocardiography now easily preformed with single-beat full volume capture promises to further refine HF diagnosis. Finally, speckle-based strain and strain rate, and three-dimensional speckle imaging, are more novel techniques that can shed light on detailed myocardial mechanics in patients with depressed or preserved LVEF.

Autologous versus allogeneic transfusion: patients' perceptions and experiences.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative autologous donation is one way to decrease a patient's exposure to allogeneic blood transfusion. This study was designed to determine patients' perceptions about the autologous blood donation process and their experiences with transfusion. METHODS: To assess patient perception, a questionnaire was administered a few days before surgery to patients undergoing elective cardiac and orthopedic surgery in a Canadian teaching hospital. All patients attending the preoperative autologous donation clinic during a 10-month period were eligible. A convenience sample of patients undergoing the same types of surgery who had not predonated blood were selected from preadmission clinics. Patient charts were reviewed retrospectively to assess actual transfusion practice in all cases. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients underwent cardiac surgery (40 autologous donors, 40 nondonors) and 73 underwent orthopedic surgery (38 autologous donors, 35 nondonors). Of the autologous donors, 75 (96%) attended all scheduled donation appointments, 73 (93%) said that they were "very likely" or "likely" to predonate again, and 75 (96%) said that they would recommend autologous donation to others. There was little difference in preoperative symptoms between the autologous donors and the nondonors, although the former were more likely than the latter to report that their overall health had remained the same during the month before surgery (30 [75%] v. 21 [52%] for the cardiac surgery patients and 30 [79%] v. 18 [51%] for the orthopedic surgery patients). When the autologous donors were asked what they felt their chances would have been of receiving at least one allogeneic blood transfusion had they not predonated, the median response was 80%. When they were asked what their chances were after predonating their own blood, the median response was 0%. The autologous donors were significantly less likely to receive allogeneic blood transfusions (6 [15%] for cardiac surgery and 3 [8%] for orthopedic surgery) than were the nondonors (14 [35%] for cardiac surgery and 16 [46%] for orthopaedic surgery). They were, however, more likely to receive any transfusion (autologous or allogeneic) than were the nondonors (25 [63%] v. 14 [35%] for cardiac surgery and 31 [81%] v. 16 [46%] for orthopedic surgery). INTERPRETATION: Patients who underwent preoperative autologous blood donation were positive about the experience and did not report more symptoms than patients who did not donate blood preoperatively. Autologous donors overestimated their chances of receiving allogeneic blood transfusions had they not predonated and underestimated their chances after they had predonated. They were less likely to receive allogeneic transfusions, but more likely to receive any type of transfusion, than were patients who did not predonate.