Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Improved Prognostic Performance of Cardiac Power Output With Right Atrial Pressure: A Subanalysis of the ESCAPE Trial.
Belkin, Mark N; Alenghat, Francis J; Besser, Stephanie A; Pinney, Sean P; Grinstein, Jonathan.
Afiliação
  • Belkin MN; From the University of Chicago Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Alenghat FJ; From the University of Chicago Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Besser SA; From the University of Chicago Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Pinney SP; From the University of Chicago Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Grinstein J; From the University of Chicago Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: jgrinstein@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu.
J Card Fail ; 28(5): 866-869, 2022 05.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34774746
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The initial derivation of cardiac power output (CPO) included the difference between mean arterial pressure (MAP) and right atrial pressure (RAP) in the numerator, before multiplying by cardiac output (CO). We hypothesized that the inclusion of RAP (CPO-RAP) would enhance the prognostic performance of this parameter in those with an elevated RAP. METHODS AND

RESULTS:

We obtained patient-level data from the ESCAPE trial via the Biolincc database. Participants with full final hemodynamics were included in the analysis. The CPO-RAP was calculated as [(MAP - RAP) × CO)]/451 Watts (W), and the CPO was calculated as (MAP × CO)/451. The primary outcome was freedom from left ventricular assist device, heart transplant, or death at 6 months. Included participants (n = 157) were a median of 58 years of age (interquartile range [IQR] 49-67 years), 27% were women, and 59% had ischemic cardiomyopathy. The median CPO was 0.70 W (IQR 0.50-0.90 W), and the median CPO-RAP was 0.62 W (IQR 0.47-0.79 W). In univariable logistic regressions, the CPO was not associated with the primary outcome (odds ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.08-1.29, P = .11), but the CPO-RAP was (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.54, P < .01). In Kaplan-Meier analyses, there were no significant difference in outcomes with CPO (76% vs 64%, P = .08), but for CPO-RAP, there were significant differences in outcomes (81% vs 63%, P = .01). When further delineating CPO-RAP by RAP above or below the median, there was no significant difference in the outcome for participants with a RAP 8 or less (94% vs 79%, P = .07), but a significant difference in participants with a RAP of more than 8 mm Hg (66% vs 45%, P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS:

The inclusion of RAP resulted in a significant association with the primary outcome; CPO alone was not.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Coração Auxiliar / Insuficiência Cardíaca Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Coração Auxiliar / Insuficiência Cardíaca Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article