Noortje van der Bijl1, Frederikus A Klok2, Menno V Huisman2, Jan-Kees van Rooden3, Bart J A Mertens4, Albert de Roos1, Lucia J M Kroft5. 1. Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 2. Section of Vascular Medicine, Department of General Internal Medicine-Endocrinology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Radiology, Haga Teaching Hospital, Den Haag, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. Electronic address: l.j.m.kroft@lumc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Right ventricular (RV) function is predictive of outcome in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). We assessed the possible incremental value of ventricular function with ECG-synchronized cardiac CT scanning over pulmonary CT scan angiography (CTA) for predicting short-term outcome in patients with suspected acute PE. METHODS: The local ethics committee approved the study, and informed consent was obtained. In addition to standard CTA, 430 consecutive patients (193 men, 237 women; age, 55 ± 17 years) with suspected acute PE underwent ECG-synchronized CT scanning to assess ventricular function. RV/left ventricular (LV) function ratio and pulmonary obstruction index were obtained from non-ECG-synchronized CTA. Ventricular function was used to predict adverse events (< 6 weeks). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine differences between ECG-synchronized CT scan and CTA in predicting outcome. RESULTS: In 113 patients with PE, RV and LV ejection fraction (EF) and RV/LV diameter and volume ratios were associated with adverse outcome (P < .05), whereas vascular obstruction index was not. RVEF had the largest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.88) for predicting adverse outcome but had no significant incremental value over the RV/LV function ratio (0.72; 95% CI, 0.57-0.86; P = .25). All parameters revealed high negative predictive values (94%-98%) but low positive predictive values (13%-18%). For disease-specific outcome, areas under the curve were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.69-0.91) for RVEF vs 0.68 (95% CI, 0.48-0.88) for axial RV/LV ratio; the difference was not significant (P = .07). RVEF and RV/LV ratio proved better predictors for outcome than pulmonary obstruction index (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: RVEF was the best predictor for clinical outcome in patients with acute PE. However, incremental value of RVEF over axial RV/LV ratio was not found.
BACKGROUND: Right ventricular (RV) function is predictive of outcome in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). We assessed the possible incremental value of ventricular function with ECG-synchronized cardiac CT scanning over pulmonary CT scan angiography (CTA) for predicting short-term outcome in patients with suspected acute PE. METHODS: The local ethics committee approved the study, and informed consent was obtained. In addition to standard CTA, 430 consecutive patients (193 men, 237 women; age, 55 ± 17 years) with suspected acute PE underwent ECG-synchronized CT scanning to assess ventricular function. RV/left ventricular (LV) function ratio and pulmonary obstruction index were obtained from non-ECG-synchronized CTA. Ventricular function was used to predict adverse events (< 6 weeks). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine differences between ECG-synchronized CT scan and CTA in predicting outcome. RESULTS: In 113 patients with PE, RV and LV ejection fraction (EF) and RV/LV diameter and volume ratios were associated with adverse outcome (P < .05), whereas vascular obstruction index was not. RVEF had the largest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.88) for predicting adverse outcome but had no significant incremental value over the RV/LV function ratio (0.72; 95% CI, 0.57-0.86; P = .25). All parameters revealed high negative predictive values (94%-98%) but low positive predictive values (13%-18%). For disease-specific outcome, areas under the curve were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.69-0.91) for RVEF vs 0.68 (95% CI, 0.48-0.88) for axial RV/LV ratio; the difference was not significant (P = .07). RVEF and RV/LV ratio proved better predictors for outcome than pulmonary obstruction index (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: RVEF was the best predictor for clinical outcome in patients with acute PE. However, incremental value of RVEF over axial RV/LV ratio was not found.
Authors: Thomas Lehnert; Anna Wrzesniak; Dominik Bernhardt; Hanns Ackermann; J Matthias Kerl; Fernando Vega-Higuera; Thomas J Vogl; Ralf W Bauer Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-08-14 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Halil Doğan; Albert de Roos; Jacob Geleijins; Menno V Huisman; Lucia J M Kroft Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Asim Rizvi; Roderick C Deaño; Daniel P Bachman; Guanglei Xiong; James K Min; Quynh A Truong Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2014-11-26
Authors: Yvonne M Ende-Verhaar; Lucia J M Kroft; Inge C M Mos; Menno V Huisman; Frederikus A Klok Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marie Méan; Tobias Tritschler; Andreas Limacher; Stéphane Breault; Nicolas Rodondi; Drahomir Aujesky; Salah D Qanadli Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ana Manuel; Adelina Aufico; Rui Africano; Tomáz Peralta; Abel Salas; Adelaide Silva; José Ricardo; Pedro Sabola; Domingas Baião; Carlos Sotolongo; António Dias Neto; Telmo Martins; Vasco Sabino; Joaquim van Dúnem; António Pedro Filipe Júnior Journal: Cardiovasc J Afr Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 1.167
Authors: Gudula J A M Boon; Nienke van Rein; Harm Jan Bogaard; Yvonne M Ende-Verhaar; Menno V Huisman; Lucia J M Kroft; Felix J M van der Meer; Lilian J Meijboom; Petr Symersky; Anton Vonk Noordegraaf; Frederikus A Klok Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 3.240