An echocardiographic evaluation to determine the immediate and short-term changes in biventricular systolic and diastolic functions after PDA device closure-an observational analytical prospective study (echo- PDA study).

OBJECTIVES: -This prospective study with a sizable cohort was undertaken to assess changes in left and right ventricle systolic and diastolic functions after percutaneous patent ductus arteriosus device closure with appropriate follow up evaluation. METHODS: - It is an observational analytical prospective study. Ninety-eight patients were recruited out of which sixty-eight patients underwent percutaneous PDA device closure and were taken for final analysis. The primary objective was to study the left and right ventricular systolic and diastolic functions pre- and post-procedure at 48 h with follow up analysis at six months. RESULTS: - The mean age of the patients was 7.88 ± 5.05 years with the female to male ratio was 3.85:1. Thirty-three (48.52%) of the patients had immediate post PDA device closure LV systolic dysfunction. It was more common in those having pre-procedure mean low LVEF and those having a significant reduction in mitral A velocity. It became normal at six months follow up. The study reported immediate decrease in mea/n LVEF from 63.55 ± 8.11% to 48.19 ± 7.9%. The changes in LVEDD, LVEF, LVFS and LVEDV were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). In diastolic functions, there were significant reductions in peak early and late diastolic velocities. There was no statistically significant difference in right chamber functional assessment. CONCLUSION: Asymptomatic LV systolic and diastolic dysfunction in immediate post PDA closure period is a common complication and reported in around 48.5% cases. It was more common in those having pre-procedure mean low LVEF and those having a significant reduction in mitral A velocity.

To determine the correlation between echocardiographic diastolic parameters and invasively measured left ventricular end diastolic pressure in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction- an observational, descriptive study. (CEAL-HFpEF study).

OBJECTIVES: Though invasive monitoring is the most accurate to estimate diastolic dysfunction but it has its own risk. The purpose of this study was to find out any standardized correlation between invasive and non -invasive parameters. METHODS: It is an observational, descriptive study comprising of a total of 500 patients. The primary objective of the study was to determine the correlation between echocardiographic diastolic parameters and invasively measured left ventricular end diastolic pressure (LVEDP). RESULTS: On studying correlation of different invasive and non-invasive data it was reported that there was a weak correlation between peak E velocity (r = 0.14, p = 0.631), Peak A velocity (r = 0.67, p = 0.59), IVRT (r = -0.35, p = 0.178), Mitral deceleration time (DT) (r = -0.06, p = 0.842), pulmonary venous peak systolic (r = -0.02, p = 0.966) and diastolic flows (r = 0.47, p = 0.201) to LVEDP. There was a good positive correlation between elevated LVEDP and difference in duration of pulmonary venous and mitral flow at atrial contraction (A-Ard) and E/Ea at all four longitudinal segments of the left ventricle. The sensitivity and specificity for detecting an elevated LVEDP of more than 12 mm Hg, using a cut off value of E/Ea< 8, were 89% and 90%.Lateral E/Ea ≥ 12, LAVI ≥34 mL/m2, and Ard-Ad > 30 msec have the greatest diagnostic value for diagnosing diastolic dysfunction in HFpEF patients. CONCLUSION: Lateral E/Ea ≥ 12, LAVI ≥34 mL/m2, and Ard-Ad > 30 msec have the greatest diagnostic value for diagnosing diastolic dysfunction in HFpEF patients and have good correlation with invasively measured LVEDP.

A comparative assessment of Dorsal radial artery access versus classical radial artery access for percutaneous coronary angiography-a randomized control trial (DORA trial).

OBJECTIVES: This is an open-label randomized control trial with a parallel assignment with single masking comparing patients undergoing coronary angiography via dorsal radial and classical radial access. METHODS: Study done at three tertiary cardiac care centers for two years. A total of 970 patients were finally recruited for the study. Patients were randomly selected for dorsal radial artery access Group A (485 patients) and classical radial artery access Group B (485 patients) without any bias for age & sex. RESULTS: On comparative assessment both techniques are found to be equal in terms of procedural success rate. While dorsal access was superior in terms of fewer incidences of forearm radial artery occlusion, radial artery spasm, less post-procedure persistence of pain, and hand clumsiness. In comparison to this, the number of puncture attempts and time to achieve post-procedure hemostasis is less in classical radial access. CONCLUSION: So both techniques have pros and coins and it is the discretion of interventionists to adopt which technique.