Left ventricular to left arial volume ratio in the assessment of filling pressure in patients with dyspnoea and preserved ejection fraction.

Introduction: Assessing filling pressure (FP) remains a clinical challenge despite advancements in non-invasive imaging techniques. This study investigates the utility of echocardiographic left ventricular (LV) to left atrial (LA) volume ratio in estimating the resting FP in patients with dyspnoea and preserved ejection fraction (EF). Methods: This study is a prospective, single-centre analysis of 53 consecutive patients with dyspnoea (New York Heart Association grade 2 or 3) and LVEF of ≥50% (mean age 71 ± 10 years) who underwent cardiac catheterisation, including direct measurement of LA pressure at rest using retrograde technique. Echocardiographic data were obtained 1.5 ± 1.0 h after cardiac catheterisation. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 consisted of individuals with elevated FP, indicated by a mean LA pressure or mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure of >12 mmHg, and Group 2 comprised of patients with normal FP. The LV and LA volumes were measured at three specific points: the minimum volume (LVES, LAmin), the volume during diastasis (LVdias, LAdias), and the maximum volume (LVED, LAmax). The corresponding LV/LA volume ratios were analysed: end-systole (LVES/LAmax), diastasis (LVdias/LAdias), and end-diastole (LVED/LAmin). Results: The patients in Group 1 exhibited lower LV/LA volume ratios compared with those in Group 2 (LVES/LAmax 0.44 ± 0.12 vs. 0.60 ± 0.23, P = 0.0032; LVdias/LAdias 1.13 ± 0.30 vs. 1.56 ± 0.49, P = 0.0007; LVED/LAmin 2.71 ± 1.57 vs. 4.44 ± 1.70, P = 0.0004). The LV/LA volume ratios correlated inversely with an increased FP (LVES/LAmax, r = -0.40, P = 0.0033; LVdias/LAdias, r = -0.45, P = 0.0007; LVED/LAmin, r = -0.55, P < 0.0001). Among all the measurements, the LVdias/LAdias ratio demonstrated the highest discriminatory power to distinguish patients with elevated FP from normal FP, with a cut-off value of ≤1.24 [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.822] for the entire group, encompassing both sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation. For patients in sinus rhythm specifically, the cut-off value was ≤1.28 (AUC = 0.799), with P < 0.0001 for both. The LVdias/LAdias index demonstrated non-inferiority to the E/e' ratio [ΔAUC = 0.159, confidence interval (CI) = -0.020-0.338; P = 0.0809], while surpassing the indices of LA reservoir function (ΔAUC = 0.249, CI = 0.044-0.454; P = 0.0176), LA reservoir strain (ΔAUC = 0.333, CI = 0.149-0.517; P = 0.0004), and LAmax index (ΔAUC = 0.224, CI = 0.043-0.406; P = 0.0152) in diagnosing patients with elevated FP. Conclusion: The study presents a straightforward and reproducible method for non-invasive estimation of FP using routine TTE in patients with dyspnoea and preserved EF. The LVdias/LAdias index emerges as a promising indicator for identifying elevated FP, demonstrating comparable or even superior performance to established parameters.

Left heart remodelling in hypertensive patients: a comprehensive echocardiography and computed tomography study.

Objectives: This study aimed to assess left heart remodelling changes in hypertension, excluding underlying ischaemic heart disease, utilising computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Methods: A total of 178 patients (mean age 60 ± 9 years, 53% female) were enrolled in the study: Group 1 consisted of patients with essential hypertension (n = 96, Group 1), and Group 2 served as age-matched controls (n = 82, Group 2). All participants underwent both CTCA and TTE. TTE measurements included left ventricle (LV) concentricity and function and left atrial (LA) volume and function. Using both CTCA and TTE, we measured LV diastasis volume (LVdias) and LA diastasis volume (LAdias). Results: LV mass index and LV mass/height2.7 were similar in both the groups. However, Group 1 had a higher prevalence of concentric LV remodelling, characterised by a larger mean LV wall thickness, increased relative wall thickness ratio, and a reduced ratio of LV end-diastolic volume (LVED) index to mean wall thickness (55 ± 14 vs. 65 ± 15, p = 0.0007). Group 1 showed higher LAdias and LA minimal volumes, while LA reservoir function was lower in Group 2. The LVdias/LAdias ratio was lower in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (TTE 1.77 ± 0.61 vs. 2.24 ± 1.24, p = 0.0025, CTCA 1.50 ± 0.23 vs. 1.69 ± 0.41, p = 0.0002). A composite score based on four combined TTE parameters, namely, LVED index/mean wall thickness ≤57, ratio of early diastolic mitral inflow to mitral annular tissue velocities (E/e') >8, LVdias/LAdias ≤1.62, and LA reservoir function ≤0.58, yielded the highest discriminatory power (area under the curve-AUC = 0.772) for distinguishing patients with hypertensive heart disease (HHD). Collectively, we refer to these parameters as the LEDA score, with each parameter scored as one point. For LEDA scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, the probability of underlying HHD was 0%, 23%, 59%, 80%, and 95%, respectively. Furthermore, a CTCA-derived LVdias/LAdias ≤1.76, considered as a single parameter, demonstrated modest accuracy in differentiating patients with HHD (AUC = 0.646). Conclusions: The TTE LEDA score, based on four parameters, namely, LVED index/mean wall thickness, E/e', LVdias/LAdias, and LA reservoir function, proved to be the most effective in defining left heart remodelling in hypertension.