- Journal List
- Anatol J Cardiol
- v.28(8); 2024 Aug
- PMC11317779
As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsem*nt of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice
Anatol J Cardiol. 2024 Aug; 28(8): 393–398.
Published online 2024 Aug 1. doi:10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.3562
PMCID: PMC11317779
PMID: 38798238
Serhat Erol,
1 Aslıhan Gürün Kaya,1 Fatma Arslan,1 Sümeyye Ayöz,1 Ayşegül Gürsoy Çoruh,2 Melahat Kul,2 Evren Özçınar,3 Aydın Çiledağ,1 Zeynep Pınar Önen,1 Akın Kaya,1 Özlem Özdemir Kumbasar,1 and Stavros V. Konstantinides4
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer
Abstract
Background:
Right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) is the main determinant of mortality in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). Thus, guidelines recommend the assessment of RVD with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) or computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) among these patients. In this study, we investigated the agreement between TTE and CTPA for the detection of RVD.
Methods:
This single-center retrospective study included patients who were diagnosed with CTPA and underwent TTE within the first 24 hours following the diagnosis.
Results:
Two hundred fifty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. In 71.3% (184) of them, CTPA and TTE agreed on both the presence and absence of RVD. There was a moderate agreement between the 2 tests (Cohen’s kappa = 0.404, P < .001). The agreement between right ventricle dysfunction on TTE and the increased right ventricle/left ventricle (RV/LV) on CTPA was fair (Cohen’s kappa = 0.388, P < .001). Three patients died due to PE, and another 5 patients required urgent reperfusion therapy. Overall, adverse outcomes occurred in 4% (8) of patients. The sensitivity of modalities in the detection of adverse outcomes was 100%. Transthoracic echocardiography was more specific compared to CTPA (43% vs. 28%). Statistically, flattening/bulging of the interventricular septum on TTE was significantly associated with adverse outcomes. No individual CTPA parameter was related to adverse outcomes.
Conclusion:
Both CTPA and TTE are reliable imaging modalities in the detection of RVD. However, TTE is more specific, and this may help in the identification and appropriate management of patients at higher risk of decompensation. A combination of CTPA parameters rather than individual RV/LV ratios increases the sensitivity of CTPA.
Keywords: Pulmonary embolism, risk stratification, prognosis, transthoracic echocardiography, computed tomography
Highlights
Both transthoracic echocardiography and computed tomography pulmonary angiography are reliable methods in risk stratification of pulmonary embolism.
Transthoracic echocardiography has a higher specificity. This may help to identify patients at high risk of decompensation.
Introduction
Right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) is the main determinant of mortality in pulmonary embolism (PE).1 Patients considered to be at low risk may have RVD, and early discharge of PE patients may cause increased mortality.2-4 Thus, current guidelines1 recommend assessment of the right ventricle (RV) to avoid erroneous discharge of patients with RVD and catastrophic consequences like post-discharge mortality.
Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the standard method in the assessment of RV, which shows more parameters and real-time images of RV and enables the detection of intracardiac thrombus and/or RV hypokinesia.5-8 However, it is operator-dependent and not always available, especially during night shifts and emergencies.
Computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) enables both diagnosis and risk stratification. Also, the extent of thrombi can be visualized with CTPA. It is widely available and can be reviewed by different clinicians, even from outside the hospital. However, CTPA gives static information about the RV. Intracardiac thrombus and/or RV hypokinesia cannot be recognized by CTPA.
Right ventricle assessment is crucial for safe discharge. And if the assessment is done with CTPA, it must be at least as accurate and reliable as TTE. Though studies revealed the accuracy of CTPA in risk stratification of PE,9-11 we hypothesized that inferiorities of CTPA, such as the inability to detect RV hypokinesia or RV thrombus, may cause misclassification of patients who need longer medical attention. Thus, we aimed to investigate the accuracy of CTPA in the identification of RVD and compare it with TTE.
Methods
In this single-center retrospective study, we reviewed the electronic medical files of patients who were diagnosed with PE between 2013 and 2022. Patients who were diagnosed with CTPA and underwent TTE within the first 24 hours following the diagnosis were enrolled.
Exclusion Criteria
Transthoracic echocardiography after 24 hours of diagnosis or after thrombolytic therapy
Patients known to have pulmonary hypertension or RV failure before PE
Patients with recurrent PE (pulmonary embolism is developed after completion of anticoagulation) or breakthrough PE (pulmonary embolism developing while under anticoagulation)
Patients diagnosed with CTPA acquisition phase incompatibility and movement artifacts, and/or those in whom measurement of heart chambers, evaluation of inferior vena cava (IVC) reflux, and interventricular septum (IVS) morphology was not possible.
Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography Imaging Analysis and Determinants of Right Ventricle Dysfunction
All examinations were performed on 64-detector row (Toshiba Aquilion, Otawara, Japan) and 16-detector row (General Electric’s Healthcare Bright Speed Delight, Milwaukee, USA; Siemens Somatom Sensation, Forchheim, Germany) computed tomography (CT) scanners. Computed tomographic pulmonary angiography evaluation of patients was performed by 2 radiologists (M.K. and A.G.Ç), each with more than 6 years of experience. Right ventricular and left ventricular measurements were done by evaluating the ventricle diameters in the standard axial view, measuring the maximal distance between the ventricular endocardium and the IVS, perpendicular to the long axis of the heart, and using the maximum dimensions for both ventricles which may be found at different levels. Measuring RV/LV ratio ≥ 1 was considered as RV dysfunction. Interventricular septum morphology was defined as normal (convex to the RV), flattened, or bent [convex to the left ventricle (LV)]. When contrast material was detected in the intrahepatic part of the IVC, contrast media reflux was recorded.
If at least one of the RV/LV ratios is ≥1, IVS flattening/bulging, or IVC contrast media reflux is present, it is considered as RVD.
Determinants of Right Ventricle Dysfunction on Transthoracic Echocardiography
Transthoracic echocardiography findings were defined as the enlarged RV, flattened IVS, RV hypo/akinesia, pulmonary arterial systolic pressure ≥40 mm Hg, or right heart thrombus.
Troponin T ≥ 0.3 ng/mL and/or brain natriuretic peptide >150 pg/mL are considered high cardiac biomarkers.
Right ventricular function and dilatation were assessed according to the recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography.12,13 The recommended echocardiographic views for the evaluation of the right ventricular size and systolic function were the standard apical 4-chamber view and the apical 4-chamber view with a focus on the RV view. For interpreting the RV dilatation, loading measures reflect the systolic function. The cavity size of RV relative to LV and the shape of the IVS suggest RV dilatation. For evaluating the contractility of RV, such as hypokinetic, we use the measurement of change in the area of the cavity.
Patent foramen ovale (PFO) was assessed by subcostal view and parasternal short-axis view by Doppler echocardiogram.
Final risk stratification of patients was done according to the current European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines.1 Echocardiography findings were used for risk stratification. Some patients didn’t have cardiac enzymes. Thus, patients are classified as intermediate if there was RVD on echocardiography. If echo findings were normal, patients were classified as not applicable (NA).
Definition of Adverse Events
An adverse event was defined as death due to PE or the requirement of urgent reperfusion therapy. PE-related death is defined according to International Society on Thrombosisnand Haemostasis (ISTH) recommendations.14
Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software (Chicago, Ill, USA). Demographic and clinical data are expressed as means with standard deviations for continuous variables and as frequencies with percentages for categorical variables. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for predicting adverse outcomes were assessed for CTPA or TTE-derived adverse outcomes. Inter-rater agreement between CTPA and TTE was determined using Cohen’s kappa coefficient statistic. The relationships between age, gender, having any comorbid disease, and findings of CTPA and TTE were assessed with binary logistic regression analyses. For the multiple analysis, the possible factors identified with univariant analysis were further entered into the logistic regression analyses. Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness of fit statistics was used to assess model fit. The statistical significance level was expressed as P < .001 for all tests.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was approved by Local Ethics Committee number: 2023000589-1 (2023/589).
Results
There were 299 patients. Among them, 41 were excluded (15 due to a previous history of PE, 13 due to the possibility of previous pulmonary hypertension, and 13 due to poor CTPA technique). Of the study population, 258 patients (52.3% female) with a mean age of 62.5 ± 16.3 met the inclusion criteria. All patients were hospitalized in the first few days of treatment.
Among the 258 patients, there were 70 (27.1%) low risk, 13 (5%) intermediate risk, 78 (30.2%) intermediate low risk, 72 (27.9%) intermediate high risk, and 8 (3.1%) high risk. In 17 (6.6%) patients, risk stratification was not applicable because eco findings were normal but patients didn’t have cardiac enzyme results.
Right ventricular dysfunction was demonstrated in 65.9% (170) of CTPA and 55.8% (144) of TTE (P < .001). The main findings of CTPA and TTE are presented in Table 1. In 71.3% (n = 184) of patients, CTPA and TTE agreed on the presence or absence of RVD. Among the remaining 74 patients, 24 (9.3%) had normal CTPA but RVD on TTE, and 50 (19.3%) had normal TTE but CTPA demonstrated RVD (Table 2). There was a weak agreement between the 2 tests (Cohen’s kappa = 0.404, P < .001).
Table 1.
Transthoracic Echocardiography and Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography Findings
| Transthoracic Echocardiography | n (%) |
|---|---|
| RV dilatation | 75 (29.1) |
| Flattening/bulging of IVS | 7 (2.7) |
| Hypokinesia | 31 (12.0) |
| Intracardiac thrombus | 4 (1.6) |
| PFO | 10 (3.9) |
| Increased sPAP | 136 (52.7) |
| Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography | n (%) |
| RV/LV ≥ 1 | 142 (55) |
| Flattening/bulging of IVS | 120 (46.5) |
| IVC reflux | 96 (37.2) |
Open in a separate window
IVC, inferior vena cava; IVS, interventricular septum; PFO, patent foramen ovale; RV, right ventricle; sPAP, systolic pulmonary arterial pressure.
Table 2.
Agreement Between Transthoracic Echocardiography and Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography to Detect Right Ventricle Dysfunction
| RV Dysfunction on CTPA | Agreement | Kappa Coefficient and P | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | ||||
| RV dysfunction on TTE | No | 64 | 50 | 52.6% | κ= 0.404, <.001 |
| Yes | 24 | 120 | 83.3% | ||
Open in a separate window
CTPA, computed tomography pulmonary angiography; RV, right ventricle; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography.
As the RV/LV ratio is mostly used CT signs of right heart dysfunction in PE, we compared the TTE findings with the RV/LV ratio on CTPA. The agreement between RV dysfunction on TTE and increased RV/LV on CTPA was minimal (Cohen’s kappa = 0.388, P < .001). In 40 patients, TTE showed RVD, but the RV/LV ratio was below 1.0 on CTPA (Table 3).
Table 3.
Agreement Between Right Ventricle Dysfunction on Transthoracic Echocardiography and Right Ventricle/Left Ventricle > 1 on Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography
| RV/LV > 1 on CTPA | Agreement | Kappa Coefficient and P | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | ||||
| RV Dysfunction on TTE | No | 76 | 38 | 66.7% | κ = 0.388, <0.001 |
| Yes | 40 | 104 | 72.2% | ||
Open in a separate window
RV, right ventricle; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography; CTPA, computed tomography pulmonary angiography
Overall, 8 patients had high-risk PE at presentation; both TTE and CTPA showed RVD in these patients.
There were 31 patients with RV hypokinesia on TTE. Among them, 27 had RVD on CTPA. There were 4 patients with intracardiac thrombus on TTE, and all of them had RVD on CTPA.
There were 96 (37.2%) patients with reflux in the IVC, and among them, 68 (70.8%) had RVD on TTE. Among the 96 patients with reflux in the IVC, 45 (54.2%) had increased cardiac biomarkers.
There were 10 patients with PFO, and all of them had increased estimated systolic pulmonary artery pressure. Thus, PFO might be due to increased pressure. Among these 10 patients, CTPA detected RVD in 8.
A total of 17 patients died. Among them, 3 died due to PE. The first patient was at high risk at presentation. The second presented with intermediate–high-risk PE but progressed to high risk and died during catheter-directed treatment. The last patient was admitted with intermediate–low-risk PE but died due to sudden cardiac arrest. Both TTE and CTPA revealed RVD in these 3 patients. Another 5 patients initially at intermediate risk required urgent reperfusion therapy. Both TTE and CTPA revealed RVD in these 5 patients. As a result, in 8 (4%) patients, adverse outcomes occurred.
To determine the effect of TTE and CTPA parameters on adverse outcomes, logistic regression analysis was performed and showed a significant association between the flattening/bulging of IVS on TTE and adverse outcomes (Table 4). Both modalities had high negative predictive values. However, TTE was more specific than CTPA (Table 5).
Table 4.
Binary Logistic Regression Analyses Between Composite Outcome and Findings Related to Right Ventricle Dysfunction
| Univariate Analysis | Multiple Analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | P | OR (95% CI) | P | |
| Age | 0.994 (0.953-1.037) | .798 | ||
| Gender (male) | 1.864 (0.436-7.970) | .401 | ||
| Increased cardiac biomarker | 1.104 (0.713-1.869) | .507 | ||
| RV dilatation on TTE | 7.87 (1.551-39.931) | .013 | 1.683 (0.083-34.135) | .734 |
| Flattening/bulging of IVS (TTE) | 36.9 (6.482-210.06) | <.001 | 60.651 (3.038-1210.717) | .007 |
| Hypokinesia | 14.359 (3.243-63.575) | <.001 | 6.923 (0.880-54.479) | .066 |
| Intracardiac thrombus | 11.762 (1.084-127.671) | .043 | 0.137 (0.001-14.406) | .403 |
| sPAP (mm Hg) | 1.068 (1.023-1.115) | .003 | 1.070 (0.980-1.169) | .131 |
| Flattening/bulging of IVS (CTPA) | 3.579 (0.709-18.076) | .123 | 0.992 (0.140-7.025) | .994 |
| IVC reflux | 1.808 (0.358-9.140) | .474 | 4.842 (0.541-43.348) | .158 |
Open in a separate window
CTPA, computed tomography pulmonary angiography; IVC, inferior vena cava; IVS, interventricular septum; OR, odds ratio; RV, right ventricle; sPAP, systolic pulmonary arterial pressure; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography.
Table 5.
Performance of Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography and Transthoracic Echocardiography on Prediction of Adverse Outcomes
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive Predictive Value | Negative Predictive Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RV dysfunction on TTE | 100% | 43% | 93% | 100% |
| RV dysfunction on CTPA | 100% | 28% | 94% | 100% |
Open in a separate window
CTPA, computed tomography pulmonary angiography; TTE, transthoracic echocardiography.
Discussion
In this study, we aimed to compare the accuracy of CTPA with TTE in the identification of RVD. We found that CTPA was more sensitive and less specific compared to TTE in the identification of RVD and adverse outcomes.
There are a few studies that compare the correlation between CTPA and TTE. In the prospective study by Dudzinski et al,15 CT findings of RV strain were defined as RV/LV ≥0.9 or interventricular bowing. Two modalities agreed in 59% of patients (κ= 0.24). Computed tomography was more sensitive but less specific compared to TTE. Park et al16 compared the hypokinesia on TTE with RV/LV ≥1, septal bowing, and embolus location on CTPA. The combination of CTPA parameters increased the specificity and sensitivity of CTPA. Wake et al17 found a moderate correlation between CTPA-derived RV/LV ratio and RV size determined with TTE. The sensitivity of CTPA was higher. Right ventricle was enlarged in 39% of TTE, and 48.6% of patients had RV/LV >1 on CTPA. Contrary to these studies, Ammari et al18 found similar proportions of patients with RV/LV >1 and a statistically significant correlation between TTE and CTPA. Also, in our study, CTPA was more sensitive compared to TTE. Right ventricular dysfunction was detected in 65.9% (170) of CTPA and 55.8% (144) of TTE (P < .001). Also, in patients with increased cardiac biomarkers, CTPA detected more RVD compared to TTE (93.3% vs. 81.3%). The higher sensitivity of CTPA might be due to the timing of TTE. Patients received anticoagulation and oxygen supplementation, if necessary, before TTE, and during this time, cardiac functions might have been normalized.
In the present study, there was a fair correlation between the RV/LV ratio on CTPA and TTE findings (Cohen’s kappa = 0.388). In 40 patients, despite the RVD findings on TTE, the RV/LV ratio was below 1 on CTPA. But when the RV/LV ratio was combined with other CTPA parameters, flattening/bulging of IVS, Vena Cava Inferior (VCI) reflux agreement with TTE, and the sensitivity of CTPA increased. This was also reported by Park et al.13 The authors found that the combination of RV/LV ratio with septal bowing and embolus location resulted in sensitivity and specificity. These results show the importance of the holistic assessment of CTPA findings. A combination of CTPA parameters increases the sensitivity and specificity compared to individual RV/LV ratios.
The main limitation of CTPA is its inability to detect intracardiac thrombus and RV hypokinesia. In our cohort, there was 1 patient with intracardiac thrombus on TTE, and even though CTPA did not recognize intracardiac thrombus, it detected RVD in all this patient. There were 25 patients with RV hypokinesia on TTE. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography showed RVD in 22 of these 25 (88%) patients. Although the remaining 3 patients with RV hypokinesia did not experience any adverse outcome, we think this is an important inferiority of CTPA in patients with a plan of early discharge.
In our study, adverse outcomes occurred in 8 (4%) patients. Despite the high number of RVD on TTE or CTPA, there was a relatively low rate of adverse outcomes. Also, in the previous studies, RVD was a common finding, but the rate of an adverse outcome was low.8,15,18-20 There are some possible other explanations. First, this may be due to the compensatory mechanism of the heart. Second, it might be due to an improved detection and effective treatment of patients with RVD. As Barco et al21 reported, pulmonary embolism-related mortality is decreasing in the European region, and one of the possible explanations is improved treatment. Third, as Hadad et al22 stated, maybe the increased RV/LV ratio is due to the patient’s baseline conditions rather than a cardiac response to PE. High rates of RVD on CTPA or TTE may cause the utilization of additional tests such as cardiac biomarkers and possibly longer hospitalization. On the other hand, these precautions might provide increased safety for patients and minimize the possibility of post-discharge mortality or early complications.
No individual CTPA parameter was related to adverse outcomes. Although univariate analysis showed a significant association between RV hypokinesia and adverse outcomes, in multiple analysis, this association lost its significance. Transthoracic echocardiography had a higher specificity compared to CTPA in our study. Statistically, TTE flattening/bulging of IVS on TTE was significantly associated with adverse outcomes. Some previous studies also showed higher specificity of TTE.13,14,17 This means the ability of TTE to detect patients at imminent risk of hemodynamical decompensation is higher compared to CTPA. Thus, TTE might be more accurate in the selection of appropriate management, such as reperfusion therapy or intensive care unit admission, especially in intermediate high-risk pulmonary embolism.
Reflux in the IVC is a sign of right-sided heart disease23,24 and has previously been shown as a predictor of mortality.25-27 Thus, we thought that reflux in the IVC might be a more specific parameter for the determination of RVD with CTPA. However, there was no significant association between IVC reflux and adverse outcomes.
Study Limitations
There are several limitations of our study. First is the performance of TTE by different operators on duty. Second, some echocardiographic parameters such as tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) were missing. Third, sPAP rather than the velocity of tricuspid regurgitation (TRV) was reported for assessment of RV pressure overload. Thus, we had to define a cutoff for sPAP. According to the Bernoulli equation (4 × TRV2 + right atrial pressure), 40 mm Hg sPAP corresponds approximately to the TRV 2.8 m/s as recommended by ESC pulmonary hypertension guidelines.28 So, we accepted 40 mm Hg as a cutoff. However, we are aware that this cutoff is open to debate.
Conclusion
Both CTPA and TTE have high sensitivity in the detection of RVD. A combination of CTPA parameters rather than individual RV/LV ratios increases the reliability of CTPA. Transthoracic echocardiography is more specific, and this may help in the identification and appropriate management of patients at higher risk of decompensation.
Funding Statement
The authors declare that this study received no financial support.
Footnotes
Ethics Committee Approval: The study was approved by the Ankara University Ethics Committee No: 2023000589-1 (2023/589). This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Informed Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.
Author Contributions: Concept – S.E., A.G.K, F.A., S.A., E.Ö.; Design – S.E., A.G.K., F.A., S.A., E.Ö.; Supervision – Z.P.Ö., A.C.Ç, A.K., Ö.Ö.K., S.K.; Resources – S.E., A.G.K., F.A., S.A., E.Ö.; Materials – S.E., A.G.K, F.A., S.A., E.Ö. A.G.Ç., M.K.; Data Collection and/or Processing – S.E, A.G.K., F.A., S.A., E.Ö. A.G.C., M.K.; Analysis and/or Interpretation – S.E., A.G.K., F.A., S.A., E.O. A.G.Ç., M.K., Ö.Ö.K., Z.P.Ö., A.Ç., S.K.; Literature Search – S.E., A.G.K., F.A., S.A., E.Ö.; Writing – S.E., A.G.K, F.A., S.A., E.Ö., A.G.Ç., M.K., Ö.Ö.K., Z.P.Ö., A.Ç., S.K.; Critical Review – S.E., A.G.K., F.A., S.A., E.Ö. A.G.Ç., M.K., Ö.Ö.K., Z.P.Ö., A.Ç., S.K.
Declaration of Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
References
1. Konstantinides SV, Meyer G, Becattini C, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS). Eur Heart J. 2020;41(4):543603. ( 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz405) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
2. Otero R, Uresandi F, Jiménez D, et al. Home treatment in pulmonary embolism. Thromb Res. 2010;126(1):e1e5. ( 10.1016/j.thromres.2009.09.026) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
3. Aujesky D, Stone RA, Kim S, Crick EJ, Fine MJ. Length of hospital stay and postdischarge mortality in patients with pulmonary embolism: a statewide perspective. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(7):706712. ( 10.1001/archinte.168.7.706) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
4. Barco S, Mahmoudpour SH, Planquette B, Sanchez O, Konstantinides SV, Meyer G. Prognostic value of right ventricular dysfunction or elevated cardiac biomarkers in patients with low-risk pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(11):902910. ( 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy873) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
5. Bossone E, D’Andrea A, D’Alto M, et al. Echocardiography in pulmonary arterial hypertension: from diagnosis to prognosis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013;26(1):114. ( 10.1016/j.echo.2012.10.009) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
6. Dabbouseh NM, Patel JJ, Bergl PA. Role of echocardiography in managing acute pulmonary embolism. Heart. 2019;105(23):17851792. ( 10.1136/heartjnl-2019-314776) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
7. Pruszczyk P, Kurnicka K, Ciurzyński M, et al. Defining right ventricular dysfunction by echocardiography in normotensive patients with pulmonary embolism. Pol Arch Intern Med. 2020;130(9):741747. ( 10.20452/pamw.15459) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
8. Bikdeli B, Lobo JL, Jiménez D, et al. Early use of echocardiography in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: findings from the RIETE registry. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(17):e009042. ( 10.1161/JAHA.118.009042) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
9. Becattini C, Agnelli G, Vedovati MC, et al. Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism: diagnosis and risk stratification in a single test. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(13):16571663. ( 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr108) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
10. Meinel FG, Nance JW, Schoepf UJ, et al. Predictive value of computed tomography in acute pulmonary embolism: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Med. 2015;128(7):74759.e2. ( 10.1016/j.amjmed.2015.01.023) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
11. Schoepf UJ, Kucher N, Kipfmueller F, Quiroz R, Costello P, Goldhaber SZ. Right ventricular enlargement on chest computed tomography: a predictor of early death in acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation. 2004;110(20):32763280. ( 10.1161/01.CIR.0000147612.59751.4C) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
12. Rudski LG, Lai WW, Afilalo J, et al. Guidelines for the echocardiographic assessment of the right heart in adults: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography endorsed by the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010;23(7):685713. ( 10.1016/j.echo.2010.05.010) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
13. Weekes AJ, Oh L, Thacker G, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement on qualitative assessments of right ventricular dysfunction with echocardiography in patients with pulmonary embolism. J Ultrasound Med. 2016;35(10):21132120. ( 10.7863/ultra.15.11007) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
14. Tritschler T, Kraaijpoel N, Girard P, et al. Definition of pulmonary embolism-related death and classification of the cause of death in venous thromboembolism studies: communication from the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(6):14951500. ( 10.1111/jth.14769) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
15. Dudzinski DM, Hariharan P, Parry BA, Chang Y, Kabrhel C. Assessment of right ventricular strain by computed tomography versus echocardiography in acute pulmonary embolism. Acad Emerg Med. 2017;24(3):337343. ( 10.1111/acem.13108) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
16. Park JR, Chang SA, Jang SY, et al. Evaluation of right ventricular dysfunction and prediction of clinical outcomes in acute pulmonary embolism by chest computed tomography: comparisons with echocardiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;28(4):979987. ( 10.1007/s10554-011-9912-4) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
17. Wake N, Kumamaru KK, George E, et al. Computed tomography and echocardiography in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: part 1: correlation of findings of right ventricular enlargement. J Thorac Imaging. 2014;29(1):W1W6. ( 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000047) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
18. Ammari Z, Hasnie AA, Ruzieh M, et al. Prognostic value of computed tomography versus echocardiography derived right to left ventricular diameter ratio in acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Med Sci. 2021;361(4):445450. ( 10.1016/j.amjms.2020.07.008) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
19. George E, Kumamaru KK, Ghosh N, et al. Computed tomography and echocardiography in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: part 2: prognostic value. J Thorac Imaging. 2014;29(1):W7W12. ( 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000048) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
20. Andrade I, Mehdipoor G, Le Mao R, et al. Prognostic significance of computed tomography-assessed right ventricular enlargement in low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism: systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Res. 2021;197:4855. ( 10.1016/j.thromres.2020.10.034) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
21. Barco S, Mahmoudpour SH, Valerio L, et al. Trends in mortality related to pulmonary embolism in the European Region, 2000-15: analysis of vital registration data from the WHO Mortality Database. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(3):277287. ( 10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30354-6) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
22. Hadad Y, Iluz M, Ziv-Baran T, et al. High prevalence of right ventricular/left ventricular ratio ≥1 among patients undergoing computed tomography pulmonary angiography. J Thorac Imaging. 2021;36(4):231235. ( 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000547) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
23. Aviram G, Cohen D, Steinvil A, et al. Significance of reflux of contrast medium into the inferior vena cava on computerized tomographic pulmonary angiogram. Am J Cardiol. 2012;109(3):432437. ( 10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.09.033) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
24. Yeh BM, Kurzman P, Foster E, Qayyum A, Joe B, Coakley F. Clinical relevance of retrograde inferior vena cava or hepatic vein opacification during contrast-enhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183(5):12271232. ( 10.2214/ajr.183.5.1831227) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
25. Bach AG, Nansalmaa B, Kranz J, et al. CT pulmonary angiography findings that predict 30-day mortality in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84(2):332337. ( 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.11.023) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
26. Aviram G, Rogowski O, Gotler Y, et al. Real-time risk stratification of patients with acute pulmonary embolism by grading the reflux of contrast into the inferior vena cava on computerized tomographic pulmonary angiography. J Thromb Haemost. 2008;6(9):14881493. ( 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.03079.x) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
27. Bailis N, Lerche M, Meyer HJ, Wienke A, Surov A. Contrast reflux into the inferior vena cava on computer tomographic pulmonary angiography is a predictor of 24-hour and 30-day mortality in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Acta Radiol. 2021;62(1):3441. ( 10.1177/0284185120912506) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
28. Humbert M, Kovacs G, Hoeper MM, et al. ESC/ERS Scientific Document Group. ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(38):36183731. ( 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac237). Erratum in: Eur Heart J. 2023;44(15): 1312. ( 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad005) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Anatolian Journal of Cardiology are provided here courtesy of Turkish Society of Cardiology
