Evaluation of mean right atrial pressure by two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography in patients with cardiac disease.

BACKGROUND: Several approaches have been used for noninvasive estimation of right atrial pressure (RAP), but, no currently available method has gained any definite validation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography in estimating mean RAP in patients with cardiac disease. METHODS: We examined the relation of mean RAP to right atrial size and function, size and respiratory changes of inferior vena cava and Doppler parameters of tricuspid and hepatic vein flow in 114 consecutive patients (77 men, 37 women; mean age 57 +/- 12 years) with various cardiac diseases undergoing cardiac catheterization. Echocardiographic studies were performed within 24 hours before catheterization (mean interval 6 +/- 3 hours). Patients were assigned to 3 groups according to the values of mean RAP (group 1, < or = 8 mmHg; group 2, between 9 and 12 mmHg; group 3, > 12 mmHg). RESULTS: Mean RAP ranged from 3 to 20 mmHg (mean 9.1 +/- 4.3 mmHg). It correlated most strongly with the collapsibility index of inferior vena cava (IVCCI) (r = -0.76), minimal inspiratory diameter of inferior vena cava (r = 0.72) and deceleration time of early tricuspid flow (DT) (r = -0.61). Discriminant analysis demonstrated that IVCCI and DT were major determinants of mean RAP with 81.6% of cases correctly assigned to study groups: 96% of patients of group 1 and 87% of patients of group 3 were identified, whereas the accuracy in identifying the patients of group 2 was lower (46%). An IVCCI > 45% was the best cutoff point in predicting a mean RAP < or = 8 mmHg; an IVCCI < 35% and a DT < 150 msec were the best cutoff points in predicting a mean RAP > or = 15 mmHg. The best multivariate equation predicting mean RAP was: mean RAP = 23.3 - 0.2 IVCCI -0.026 DT (r = 0.80, R2 = 0.64). This equation was 81% sensitive and 84% specific in detecting a mean RAP < or = 8 mmHg and 74% sensitive and 97% specific in detecting a mean RAP > 12 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Mean RAP can be estimated noninvasively by two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography. The combined analysis of IVCCI and DT provides an accurate prediction on mean RAP < or = 8 mmHg and > 12 mmHg, whereas the prediction of intermediate values is less accurate.

Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of left ventricular end-diastolic pressure in patients with coronary artery disease.

Pulmonary venous flow velocity recordings have been found to be useful in complementing the information obtained from the mitral flow velocity and improving the assessment of left ventricular diastolic pressures. This study was undertaken to evaluate the accuracy of mitral flow and pulmonary venous flow variables, recorded by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography, in estimating left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) in 101 consecutive patients with coronary artery disease undergoing diagnostic left-sided heart catheterization. Patients were assigned to three groups according to the values of LVEDP (group 1, < or = 12 mm Hg; group 2, between 13 and 19 mm Hg; and group 3, > or = 20 mm Hg). LVEDP correlated most strongly with systolic fraction of pulmonary venous flow (r = -0.76), isovolumic relaxation time (r = -0.76), E/A ratio (r = 0.74), deceleration time of early mitral flow (r = -0.74), and mitral A wave duration/pulmonary venous A wave duration (AD/PVAD) ratio (r = -0.70) (p < 0.01 for each correlation). Discriminant analysis demonstrated that deceleration time, AD/PVAD ratio, and isovolumic relaxation time were major determinants of LVEDP, with 87.1% of patients correctly assigned to study groups; 97% of patients of group 1 and 95% of patients of group 3 were identified, whereas the accuracy in identifying the patients of group 2 was lower (41%). Deceleration times of 140 msec or less and AD/PVAD ratios of 0.9 or less were the best cutoff points in predicting an LVEDP of 20 mm Hg or greater. Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that the combination of mitral flow and pulmonary venous flow velocity variables provided a better estimation of LVEDP compared with that obtained from mitral flow velocity recordings alone (r = 0.88 versus 0.79; F test, 20.6). We conclude that combined analysis of mitral flow and pulmonary venous flow velocity provides, in patients with coronary artery disease, a noninvasive estimation of LVEDP with an accurate prediction of pressures of 12 mm Hg or less and 20 mm Hg or greater and less accurate prediction of intermediate values.