Objectives The right ventricular (RV) function is an important prognostic factor in acute and chronic heart failure (HF). Echocardiography is an essential imaging modality with established parameters for RV function which are useful and easy to perform. However, these fail to reflect global RV volumes due to reliability on one acoustic window. It is therefore attractive to calculate RV volumes and ejection fraction (RVEF/E) using an ellipsoid geometric model which has been validated against MRI in healthy adults but not in the HF patients. Design This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective cross-sectional study enrolling 418 consecutive patients with symptoms of HF according to a predefined study protocol. All patients underwent echocardiographic assessment of RV function using Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion (TAPSE) and RV fractional area change (RVFAC) and RVEF/E. Setting Single centre study with multiple locations for acute in-patients including high dependency units. Participants Patients with acute or exacerbation of chronic HF older than 18 y.o. Main outcome measures Ability of RVEF/E to predict patient outcomes compared with two established parameters of RV function over two-year follow-up period. Primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality. Results RVEF/E is equal to TAPSE & RVFAC in predicting outcome (p ≤ 0.01 vs p ≤ 0.01) and provides additional benefit of RV volume estimation based on standard 2D echo measurements. Conclusions In this study we have shown that RVEF/E derived from ellipsoid model is not inferior to well established measures of RV function as a prognostic indicator of outcome in the acute HF.

AimThe severity of cardiac impairment in acute heart failure (AHF) predicts outcome, but challenges remain to identify prognostically important non-invasive parameters of cardiac function. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is relevant, but only in those with reduced LV systolic function. We aimed to assess the standard and advanced parameters of left and right ventricular (RV) function from echocardiography in predicting long-term outcomes in AHF.MethodsA total of 418 consecutive AHF patients presenting over 12 months were prospectively recruited and underwent bedside echocardiography within 24 h of recruitment. We retrospectively assessed 8 RV and 5 LV echo parameters of the cardiac systolic function to predict 2-year mortality, using both guideline-directed and study-specific cutoffs, based on the maximum Youden indices via ROC analysis. For the RV, these were the tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, RV fractional area change, tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) peak tricuspid annular systolic wave velocity, both peak- and end-systolic RV free wall global longitudinal strain (RV GLS) and strain rate (mean RV GLSR), RV ejection fraction (RVEF) derived from a 2D ellipsoid model and the ratio of the TAPSE to systolic pulmonary artery pressure (SPAP). For the LV, these were the LVEF, mitral regurgitant ΔP/Δt (MR dP/dt), the lateral mitral annular TDI peak systolic wave velocity, LV GLS, and the LV GLSR.ResultsA total of 7/8 parameters of RV systolic function were predictive of 2-year outcome, with study cutoffs like international guidelines. A cutoff of < −1.8 s–1 mean RV GLSR was associated with worse outcome compared to > −1.8 s–1 [HR 2.13 95% CI 1.33–3.40 (p = 0.002)]. TAPSE:SPAP of > 0.027 cm/mmHg (vs. < 0.027 cm/mmHg) predicted worse outcome [HR 2.12 95% CI 1.53–2.92 (p < 0.001)]. A 3-way comparison of 2-year mortality by LVEF from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline criteria of LVEF > 50, 41–49, and < 40% was not prognostic [38.6% vs. 30.9 vs. 43.9% (p = 0.10)]. Of the 5 parameters of LV systolic function, only an MR dP/dt cutoff of < 570 mmHg was predictive of adverse outcome [HR 1.63 95% CI 1.01–2.62 (p = 0.047)].ConclusionWith cutoffs broadly like the ESC guidelines, we identified RV dysfunction to be associated with adverse prognosis, whereas LVEF could not identify patients at risk.

Objectives: To assess the prevalence and impact of mitral regurgitation (MR) on survival in patients presenting to hospital in acute heart failure (AHF) using traditional echocardiographic assessment alongside more novel indices of proportionality.Background: It remains unclear if the severity of MR plays a significant role in determining outcomes in AHF. There is also uncertainty as to the clinical relevance of indexing MR to left ventricular volumes. This concept of disproportionality has not been assessed in AHF.Methods: A total of 418 consecutive patients presenting in AHF over 12 months were recruited and followed up for 2 years. MR was quantitatively assessed within 24 h of recruitment. Standard proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) and a novel proportionality index of effective regurgitant orifice/left ventricular end-diastolic volume (ERO/LVEDV) >0.14 mm2/ml were used to identify severe and disproportionate MR.Results: Every patient had MR. About 331/418 (78.9%) patients were quantifiable by PISA. About 165/418 (39.5%) patients displayed significant MR. A larger cohort displayed disproportionate MR defined by either a proportionality index using ERO/LVEDV > 0.14 mm2/ml or regurgitant volumes/LVEDV > 0.2 [217/331 (65.6%) and 222/345 (64.3%), respectively]. The LVEDV was enlarged in significant MR−129.5 ± 58.95 vs. 100.0 ± 49.91 ml in mild, [p < 0.0001], but remained within the normal range. Significant MR was associated with a greater mortality at 2 years {44.2 vs. 34.8% in mild MR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.39; 95% CI: 1.01–1.92, p = 0.04]}, which persisted with adjustment for comorbid conditions (HR; 1.43; 95% CI: 1.04–1.97, p = 0.03). Disproportionate MR defined by ERO/LVEDV >0.14 mm2/ml was also associated with worse outcome [42.4 vs. 28.3% (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.12–2.34, p = 0.01)].Conclusions: MR was a universal feature in AHF and determines outcome in significant cases. Furthermore, disproportionate MR, defined either by effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) or volumetrically, is associated with a worse prognosis despite the absence of adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling. These findings outline the importance of adjusting acute volume overload to LV volumes and call for a review of the current standards of MR assessment.Clinical Trial Registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02728739, identifier NCT02728739.