Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy: Discrepancy Between Hemodynamic Measurements in the Cardiac Laboratory and Operating Room Is to Be Expected.

OBJECTIVES: It is not uncommon to observe some discrepancy in hemodynamic values characterizing left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction preoperatively and in the operating room in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Interpretation of this discrepancy can be challenging. To clarify the extent of the discrepancy, the authors compared hemodynamic variables in patients undergoing septal myectomy at the time of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Single academic medical center. INTERVENTIONS: Medical records review, study group-173 patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: While there was no statistically significant difference in resting peak LVOT gradients by preoperative transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) compared to intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (46 mmHg [19-87 mmHg] v 36 mmHg [16-71 mmHg], p = 0.231), the former were higher compared to direct needle-resting LVOT gradient measurements before myectomy (49 mmHg [19-88 mmHg] v 32 mmHg [14-67 mmHg], p = 0.0022). The prevalence of systolic anterior motion was high (94.6% v 91.6%, P = 1.000) both on pre- and intraoperative evaluation. The incidence of moderate/severe mitral was higher intraoperatively (p < 0.0001). Pulmonary artery systolic pressures measured by pulmonary artery catheter provided higher values compared to preoperative TTE estimate (39 mmHg [34-45 mmHg] v 34 mmHg [28-41 mmHg], p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Discrepancy between hemodynamic measurements in the cardiac laboratory and operating room is common and generally should not affect planned patients' care. These changes in hemodynamics might be explained by preoperative fasting, anesthetic agents, volume shifts while supine, and positive-pressure ventilation, as well as the difference in measurement techniques.

Pulmonary Embolism in Donor Lungs-Incidence and Management.

In efforts to decrease the mortality on the waiting list for lung transplantation, alternatives to increase the donor pool have been explored. Caution must be used when accepting donor lungs with pulmonary embolism (PE), as prior evidence has shown mixed results after transplantation of donor lungs with PE. However, the mere diagnosis of PE on imaging should not be the sole reason for the exclusion of these donors for transplant, and they should be reviewed as any other donor. A comprehensive evaluation should be performed for every donor, with a special focus on abnormalities of gas exchange and gross pathologic characteristics during procurement.