OBJECTIVE: In this study, we examined the role of isovolumic acceleration (IVA) measured with right ventricle (RV) tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) to predict the presence of acute pulmonary embolism (APE) in hemodynamically stable patients with clinical suspicion of APE. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This study included 25 hemodynamically stable (systolic blood pressure >90 mmHg) patients diagnosed with APE for the first time. Twenty-five subjects with similar demographic characteristics in whom APE was excluded due to preexisting clinical suspicion were also enrolled as the control group. All control group subjects were enrolled after proved to have no evidence of APE on imaging. Both groups were compared with respect to RV-IVA measured with TDI in addition to conventional echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: Among the echocardiography parameters, only RV-IVA was impaired in patients with hemodynamically stable APE compared to controls (2.85 [1.37-6.42] m/sec(2) vs. 3.32 [2.24-6.52] m/sec(2) , respectively; P = 0.02). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine the RV-IVA value to predict clinically suspected APE. A cutoff level of 3.22 m/sec(2) had a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 60%; a cutoff level of 3.17 m/sec(2) had a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 64%; and a cutoff level of 3.10 m/sec(2) had a sensitivity of 60% and specificity of 64% (ROC area under curve: 0.691, 95% CI: 0.543-0.839, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Results of our study suggest that RV-IVA may be a useful parameter to detect subtle alterations in RV and may predict the presence of APE in hemodynamically stable patients.
OBJECTIVE: In this study, we examined the role of isovolumic acceleration (IVA) measured with right ventricle (RV) tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) to predict the presence of acute pulmonary embolism (APE) in hemodynamically stable patients with clinical suspicion of APE. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This study included 25 hemodynamically stable (systolic blood pressure >90 mmHg) patients diagnosed with APE for the first time. Twenty-five subjects with similar demographic characteristics in whom APE was excluded due to preexisting clinical suspicion were also enrolled as the control group. All control group subjects were enrolled after proved to have no evidence of APE on imaging. Both groups were compared with respect to RV-IVA measured with TDI in addition to conventional echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: Among the echocardiography parameters, only RV-IVA was impaired in patients with hemodynamically stable APE compared to controls (2.85 [1.37-6.42] m/sec(2) vs. 3.32 [2.24-6.52] m/sec(2) , respectively; P = 0.02). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine the RV-IVA value to predict clinically suspected APE. A cutoff level of 3.22 m/sec(2) had a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 60%; a cutoff level of 3.17 m/sec(2) had a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 64%; and a cutoff level of 3.10 m/sec(2) had a sensitivity of 60% and specificity of 64% (ROC area under curve: 0.691, 95% CI: 0.543-0.839, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Results of our study suggest that RV-IVA may be a useful parameter to detect subtle alterations in RV and may predict the presence of APE in hemodynamically stable patients.