Lung ultrasound for the evaluation of pulmonary congestion in outpatients: a comparison with clinical assessment, natriuretic peptides, and echocardiography.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to define the performance of lung ultrasound (LUS) compared with clinical assessment, natriuretic peptides, and echocardiography, to evaluate decompensation in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) in an outpatient clinic. BACKGROUND: Evaluation of pulmonary congestion in chronic HF is challenging. LUS has been recently proposed as a reliable tool for the semiquantification of extravascular lung water through assessment of B-lines. METHODS: This was a cohort study of patients with moderate to severe systolic HF. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed to compare LUS with a previously validated clinical congestion score (CCS), amino-terminal portion of B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), E/e' ratio, chest x-ray, and 6-min walk test. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients were enrolled. Decompensation was present in 57.7% of patients when estimated by CCS, 68% by LUS, 53.6% by NT-proBNP, and 65.3% by E/e' ≥15. The number of B-lines was correlated to NT-proBNP (r = 0.72; p < 0.0001), E/e' (r = 0.68; p < 0.0001), and CCS (r = 0.43; p < 0.0001). In ROC analyses, considering as reference for decompensation a combined method (E/e' ≥ 15 and/or NT-proBNP >1,000 pg/ml), LUS yielded a C-statistic of 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to 0.96), providing the best accuracy with a cutoff ≥ 15 B-lines (sensitivity 85%, specificity 83%). A systematic approach using CCS, E/e', NT-proBNP, chest x-ray, and 6-min walk test in different combinations as reference for decompensation also corroborated this cutoff and found a similar accuracy for LUS. CONCLUSIONS: In an HF outpatient clinic, B-lines were significantly correlated with more established parameters of decompensation. A B-line ≥15 cutoff could be considered for a quick and reliable assessment of decompensation in outpatients with HF.

Avaliação do conhecimento dos cardiologistas sobre diretrizes do tratamento da fibrilação atrial / Assessment of the adherence of cardiologists to guidelines for the treatment of atrial fibrillation

FUNDAMENTO: Não existem estudos locais avaliando o conhecimento dos cardiologistas sobre as condutas no tratamento da fibrilação atrial (FA) e o conhecimento dessas diretrizes. OBJETIVO: Avaliar o conhecimento de diretrizes e práticas clínicas no tratamento da FA, relacionando-o com o tempo de graduação médica. MÉTODOS: Estudo transversal incluindo, aleatoriamente, cardiologistas, membros da Sociedade de Cardiologia do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (SOCERGS). Os médicos foram divididos pelas datas de graduação em dois grupos: acima (G1) e abaixo (G2) de 25 anos da formatura. RESULTADOS: Dos 859 membros da SOCERGS, 150 foram entrevistados, sendo que seis se recusaram a participar do estudo. O G1 foi formado por 71 e o G2 por 73 médicos. Houve diferença nos seguintes fatores: uso de beta bloqueador como droga de primeira escolha para controle da resposta na FA 59,2%(G1) vs. 91,8%(G2) (p<0,0001); uso de digoxina como droga preferencial no controle da resposta da FA=19,7%(G1) vs. 0% (G2)(p< 0,0001); warfarina como anticoagulante preferencial 71,8%(G1) vs. 93,2%(G2)(p=0,009); aplicação de algum escore de risco para anticoagulação em 73,2%(G1) vs. 87,7%(G2)(p=0,02). Em questões sobre o conhecimento das diretrizes da Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia de FA, o percentual geral de acertos foi de 82,3 %. CONCLUSÃO: A maioria das condutas clínicas referentes ao manejo da FA está de acordo com as diretrizes e a prática clínica difere conforme o tempo de graduação.

BACKGROUND: No local studies evaluating the knowledge of cardiologists on the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) and their adherence to these guidelines are available. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledge of cardiologists on the guidelines and clinical practices for the treatment of AF, correlating it to the time since medical graduation. METHODS: Cross-sectional study randomly including cardiologists affiliated to the Society of Cardiology of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Sociedade de Cardiologia do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul - SOCERGS). The physicians were divided into two groups, according to time since graduation: those graduated for more (G1) or less (G2) than 25 years. RESULTS: Of the 859 SOCERGS members, 150 were interviewed, and six refused to participate in the study. G1 comprised 71 physicians, and G2, 73. Differences were observed in regard to the following variables: use of betablockers as the first-choice drug for the control of AF response in 59.2% (G1) vs 91.8% (G2) (p<0.0001); use of digoxin as the preferred drug for the control of AF response in 19.7% (G1) vs 0% (G2) (p< 0.0001); warfarin as the preferred anticoagulant in 71.8% (G1) vs 93.2% (G2) (p=0.009); application of a risk score for anticoagulation in 73.2% (G1) vs 87.7% (G2) (p=0.02). In questions regarding the knowledge about the Brazilian Society of Cardiology's guideline for AF, the overall percentage of right answers was 82.3%. CONCLUSION: Most of the clinical measures regarding the management of AF comply with the guidelines, and the clinical practice differs according with the time since graduation.

Assessment of the adherence of cardiologists to guidelines for the treatment of atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: No local studies evaluating the knowledge of cardiologists on the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) and their adherence to these guidelines are available. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledge of cardiologists on the guidelines and clinical practices for the treatment of AF, correlating it to the time since medical graduation. METHODS: Cross-sectional study randomly including cardiologists affiliated to the Society of Cardiology of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Sociedade de Cardiologia do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul - SOCERGS). The physicians were divided into two groups, according to time since graduation: those graduated for more (G1) or less (G2) than 25 years. RESULTS: Of the 859 SOCERGS members, 150 were interviewed, and six refused to participate in the study. G1 comprised 71 physicians, and G2, 73. Differences were observed in regard to the following variables: use of betablockers as the first-choice drug for the control of AF response in 59.2% (G1) vs 91.8% (G2) (p<0.0001); use of digoxin as the preferred drug for the control of AF response in 19.7% (G1) vs 0% (G2) (p< 0.0001); warfarin as the preferred anticoagulant in 71.8% (G1) vs 93.2% (G2) (p=0.009); application of a risk score for anticoagulation in 73.2% (G1) vs 87.7% (G2) (p=0.02). In questions regarding the knowledge about the Brazilian Society of Cardiology's guideline for AF, the overall percentage of right answers was 82.3%. CONCLUSION: Most of the clinical measures regarding the management of AF comply with the guidelines, and the clinical practice differs according with the time since graduation.