RESUMO
Resumen Objetivo: Evaluar la capacidad diagnóstica de los signos radiológicos y su aplicabilidad para el diagnóstico de disección aórtica (DA). Establecer un valor de corte para el ensanchamiento mediastínico izquierdo en la DA y determinar su sensibilidad (S) y especificidad (E). Método: Se incluyeron 39 pacientes a los que se realizó angiotomografía de aorta torácica por sospecha clínica de DA, en un instituto cardiovascular de alta complejidad, del 1 de agosto de 2018 al 1 de febrero de 2019. Se realizaron radiografías de tórax de frente a todos los pacientes. Resultados: el 72% de los pacientes eran hombres. El promedio de edad fue de 63 años. La hipertensión arterial fue el factor de riesgo cardiovascular más común. El 43% de los pacientes tuvieron DA, el 76% fueron de tipo B. La media del ancho mediastínico máximo mostró una diferencia de 1,5 cm entre los pacientes con DA y sin DA. En cambio, la diferencia fue de 2 cm para el ancho mediastínico izquierdo. El ensanchamiento mediastínico máximo y del mediastino izquierdo fueron signos estadísticamente significativos; este último con muy buena capacidad diagnóstica (área bajo la curva: 0,84). Se calculó un punto de corte para el ancho mediastínico izquierdo de 5,39 cm (S: 82%; E: 77%). El ensanchamiento del botón aórtico, aorta ascendente/descendente o asimetría entre ambas también fueron signos estadísticamente significativos. Conclusiones: Los signos radiológicos para el diagnóstico de DA fueron validados. Se calculó un punto de corte para el ancho mediastínico izquierdo de 5,39 cm, con buena capacidad diagnóstica.
Abstract Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic capacity of the radiological signs for aortic dissection (AD) and their applicability for the diagnosis, as well as to establish a cut-off value for left mediastinal width in AD and determine its sensitivity (S) and specificity (E). Method: From a high complexity cardiovascular institute, 39 patients were selected and chest X-rays were performed from August 1, 2018 to February 1, 2019. Selection criteria involved those who underwent computed tomography angiography of thoracic aorta for clinical suspicion of AD. Results: Within the sample, 72% were men (mean 63 years old), with hypertension as a most common risk factor. 43% of the patient had AD, 76% were type B. The mean maximum mediastinal width showed a difference of 1.5 cm between patients with AD and those without it. In contrast, the difference was 2 cm for the left mediastinal width. Maximum mediastinal width and left mediastinal width were statistically significant signs. Left mediastinal width presented good diagnostic capacity (area under the curve: 0.84). Cut-off point of 5.39 cm for the left mediastinal width was calculated (S: 82%; E: 77%). Finally, widening of the aortic knob, ascending/descending aorta or asymmetry between both showed to be statistically significant signs. Conclusions: Radiological signs for the diagnosis of AD was validated. Also, a cut-off point for the left mediastinal width of 5.39 cm was found with a very good diagnostic capacity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Markers of myocardial necrosis and natriuretic peptides are risk predictors in decompensated heart failure (DHF). We prospectively studied the optimal timing of combined cardiac troponin T (cTnT) and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) measurements for long-term risk stratification. METHODS: cTnT and NT-proBNP were measured upon admission, and before discharge in 76 patients hospitalized for DHF (mean age 62.3 +/- 15 years; 71% men). RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 252 +/- 120 days, 39.5% of patients died or were re-hospitalized for DHF. From receiver-operator-characteristic (ROC) curves, the selected cut-off values for cTnT and NT-proBNP were 0.026 ng/ml and 3,700 pg/ml on admission, and 0.030 ng/ml and 3,200 pg/ml, respectively, at discharge. Depending upon measurements above vs below cut-off, the population was distributed on admission and before discharge for three groups: both negative (24% and 30% of patients); one positive (43% and 42%); and both positive (33% and 28%). For the admission groups, the 1-year DHF-free re-hospitalization survival rates were 85%, 60% and 34%, respectively (p = 0.0047). One-year survival rates for DHF-free re-hospitalization were 63%, 71% and 26% (p = 0.0029), respectively, for the discharge groups. In the Cox proportional hazards model, systolic blood pressure (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96 to 0.99), heart rate (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.94 to 0.98), one positive biomarker on admission (HR: 10.5; 95% CI: 1.3 to 83.7) and two positive biomarkers on admission (HR: 13.9; 95% CI: 1.8 to 98.5) were independent predictors of long-term outcomes. However, NT-proBNP on admission was the most important predictor of long-term prognosis (HR: 5.1; 95% CI: 2.3 to 12.2). CONCLUSIONS: The combined measurements of cTnT and NT-proBNP on hospital admission were more reliable than their measurements before discharge in the long-term risk stratification of DHF. A single positive measurement on admission predicted a poor long-term outcome.
