Background Noninvasive assessment of pulmonary artery systolic pressure by Doppler echocardiography (sPAPECHO) has been widely adopted to screen for pulmonary hypertension (PH), but there is still a high proportion of overestimation or underestimation of sPAPECHO. We therefore aimed to explore the accuracy and influencing factors of sPAPECHO with right heart catheterization (RHC) as a reference. Methods A total of 218 highly suspected PH patients who underwent RHC and echocardiography within 7 days were included. The correlation and consistency between tricuspid regurgitation (TR)-related methods and RHC results were tested by Pearson and Bland–Altman methods. TR-related methods included peak velocity of TR (TR Vmax), TR pressure gradient (TR-PG), TR mean pressure gradient (TR-mPG), estimated mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAPECHO), and sPAPECHO. With mPAP ≥ 25 mm Hg measured by RHC as the standard diagnostic criterion of PH, the ROC curve was used to compare the diagnostic efficacy of sPAPECHO with other TR-derived parameters. The ratio (sPAPECHO–sPAPRHC)/sPAPRHC was calculated and divided into three groups as follows: patients with an estimation error between − 10% and + 10% were defined as the accurate group; patients with an estimated difference greater than + 10% were classified as the overestimated group; and patients with an estimation error greater than − 10% were classified as the underestimated group. The influencing factors of sPAPECHO were analyzed by ordinal regression analysis. Results sPAPECHO had the highest correlation coefficient (r = 0.781, P < 0.001), best diagnostic efficiency (AUC = 0.98), and lowest bias (mean bias = 0.07 mm Hg; 95% limits of agreement, − 32.08 to + 32.22 mm Hg) compared with other TR-related methods. Ordinal regression analysis showed that TR signal quality, sPAPRHC level, and pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP) affected the accuracy of sPAPECHO (P < 0.05). Relative to the good signal quality, the OR values of medium and poor signal quality were 0.26 (95% CI: 0.14, 0.48) and 0.23 (95% CI: 0.07, 0.73), respectively. Compared with high sPAPRHC level, the OR values of low and medium sPAPRHC levels were 21.56 (95% CI: 9.57, 48.55) and 5.13 (95% CI: 2.55, 10.32), respectively. The OR value of PAWP was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.99). TR severity and right ventricular systolic function had no significant effect on the accuracy of sPAPECHO. Conclusions In this study, we found that all TR-related methods, including sPAPECHO, had comparable and good efficiency in PH screening. To make the assessment of sPAPECHO more accurate, attention should be paid to TR signal quality, sPAPRHC level, and PAWP.

Background: Noninvasive assessment of pulmonary artery systolic pressure by Doppler echocardiography (sPAPECHO) has been widely adopted to screen for pulmonary hypertension (PH). But high proportion of overestimation or underestimation of sPAPECHO still remained. So we aimed to explore the accuracy and influencing factors of sPAPECHO with right heart catheterization (RHC) as reference. Methods: A total of 218 highly suspected pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients who underwent RHC and echocardiography within 7 days were included. The correlation and consistency between tricuspid regurgitation (TR) derived parameters and RHC results were tested by Pearson and Bland-Altaman methods. With mPAP ≥25mmHg measured by RHC as the standard diagnostic criteria of PH, ROC curve was used to compared the diagnostic efficacy of sPAPECHO with other TR related methods. The ratio of (sPAPECHO-sPAPRHC)/sPAPRHC was calculated and divided into three groups, namely, the underestimation group, accurate group and overestimation group by ±10% as the boundary. The influencing factors of sPAPECHO were analyzed by ordinal regression analysis.Results: sPAPECHO had the greatest correlation coefficient (r=0.781, P<0.001), best diagnostic efficiency (AUC=0.98) and lowest bias (mean bias= 0.07mmHg, 95% limits of agreement: -32.08 to +32.22mmHg) compared with other TR related methods. Ordinal regression analysis showed that TR signal quality, PAWP and sPAPRHC level affected the accuracy of sPAPECHO (P < 0.05). The OR value of PAWP was 0.94 (95%CI: 0.89, 0.99). Compared with high sPAPRHC level, the OR value of low and medium sPAPRHC level were 21.56 (95%CI: 9.57, 48.55) and 5.13 (95%CI: 2.55, 10.32) , respectively. Relative to the signal quality of type A, the OR value of type B and C signal quality were 0.26 (95%CI: 0.14, 0.48) and 0.23 (95%CI: 0.07, 0.73), respectively. While TR severity and right ventricular systolic function had no significant effect on the accuracy of sPAPECHO. Conclusions: sPAPECHO was superior to other TR-related methods in PH screening, and was often overestimated in patients with pre-capillary PH at low sPAPRHC level, even with good TR signal quality.Trial registration: This is a retrospectively registered study.

Purpose This study aimed to explore the accuracy and influencing factors of noninvasive assessment of pulmonary artery systolic pressure by Doppler echocardiography (sPAPECHO) with right heart catheterization (RHC) as reference. Methods A total of 218 highly suspected pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients who underwent RHC and echocardiography within 7 days were included. The ratio of (sPAPECHO-sPAPRHC)/sPAPRHC was calculated and divided into three groups, namely, the underestimation group, accurate group and overestimation group by ± 10% as the boundary. The correlation and consistency between tricuspid regurgitation (TR) derived parameters and RHC results were tested by Pearson and Bland-Altaman methods. With mPAP ≥ 25mmHg measured by RHC as the standard diagnostic criteria of PH, ROC curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy. The influencing factors of sPAPECHO were analyzed by ordered regression analysis. Results sPAPECHO had the greatest correlation coefficient (r = 0.781, P < 0.001) and best diagnostic efficiency (AUC = 0.98) compared with other TR related methods. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated the bias of sPAPECHO (mean bias = 0.07mmHg, 95% limits of agreement: -32.08 to + 32.22mmHg) was lower than that of TR-PG (mean bias = 5.87mmHg, 95% limits of agreement: -26.46 to + 38.21mmHg). The results of ordered regression analysis showed that TR signal quality, PAWP and sPAPRHC level affected the accuracy of sPAPECHO (P < 0.05). Relative to the signal quality of type A, the OR value of type B and C signal quality were 0.26 (95%CI: 0.14, 0.48) and 0.23 (95%CI: 0.07, 0.73), respectively. The OR value of PAWP was 0.94 (95%CI: 0.89, 0.99). Compared with high sPAPRHC level, the OR value of low and medium sPAPRHC level were 21.56 (95%CI: 9.57, 48.55) and 5.13 (95%CI: 2.55, 10.32), respectively. Conclusion sPAPECHO was superior than other TR-related methods in screening PH. TR signal quality is vital for accurate assessment of sPAPECHO. For patients with pre-capillary disease, a higher echocardiographic threshold is more suitable for determining the possibility of PH, especially during the initial stage of disease.