Peripheral Venous Pressure Measurements to Evaluate Congestion in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Accurate bedside assessment of congestion in the management of patients with heart failure remains challenging. As a continuous conduit of circulating fluid, systemic congestion represented by high right atrial pressure (RAP) may be reflected by peripheral venous pressure (PVP). We evaluated the reliability of PVP measurements for assessing congestion beyond conventional clinical assessments. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed conventional congestion assessments and PVP measurements in 95 patients undergoing pulmonary artery catheterization. PVP was measured via the 22-gauge peripheral venous access placed in the upper extremity. The median RAP and PVP was 7 (interquartile range [IQR]: 5-11) mmHg and 9 (IQR: 7-12) mmHg, respectively, with a mean bias of 1.8 ± 2.6 mmHg. PVP exhibited a strong linear correlation with RAP (Spearman R = 0.81; P < 0.001). PVP demonstrated greater discriminatory power for both RAP ≤ 8 mmHg (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.91 [95% confidence interval: 0.85-0.97]; sensitivity: 75%; specificity: 87%) and RAP > 12 mmHg (AUC: 0.98 [0.95-1.00]; sensitivity: 88%; specificity: 95%) than edema, jugular venous pressure, pulmonary congestion on chest radiograph, B-type natriuretic peptide levels, and inferior vena cava diameter. CONCLUSIONS: PVP measured via peripheral venous access strongly correlates with invasively obtained RAP. PVP measurements may improve current bedside assessments of congestion.

Association of peripheral venous pressure with adverse post-discharge outcomes in patients with acute heart failure: a prospective cohort study.

AIMS: Congestion is the major cause of hospitalization for heart failure (HF). Traditional bedside assessment of congestion is limited by insufficient accuracy. Peripheral venous pressure (PVP) has recently been shown to accurately predict central venous congestion. We examined the association between PVP before discharge and post-discharge outcomes in hospitalized patients with acute HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Bedside PVP measurement at the forearm vein and traditional clinical examination were performed in 239 patients. The association with the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization and the incremental prognostic value beyond the established HF risk score was examined. The PVP correlated with peripheral oedema, jugular venous pressure, and inferior vena cava diameter, but not with brain-type natriuretic peptide. The 1-year incidence of the primary outcome measure in the first, second, and third tertiles of PVP was 21.4, 29.9, and 40.7%, respectively (log-rank P = 0.017). The adjusted hazard ratio of PVP per 1 mmHg increase for the 1-year outcome was 1.08 [95% confidence interval (1.03-1.14), P = 0.004]. When added onto the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic HF risk score, PVP significantly increased the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for predicting the outcome [from 0.63 (0.56-0.71) to 0.70 (0.62-0.77), P = 0.02), while traditional assessments did not. The addition of PVP also yielded significant net reclassification improvement [0.46 (0.19-0.74), P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: The PVP at discharge correlated with prognosis. The results warrant further investigation to evaluate the clinical application of PVP measurement in the care of HF. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000034279.