Supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), being atrioventricular re-entry the underlying mechanism, is the most frequent tachyarrhythmia requiring a medical treatment in infants with no cardiac disease. The acute treatment of a single episode of SVT has generally an excellent prognosis. An antiarrhythmic prophylaxis of SVT recurrences is usually recommended during the first year of life. Although many efficient drugs are available for the SVT treatment, a careful risk-benefit analysis of each single case should suggest the correct drug choice.
Congestion is the main cause of hospitalization in patients with acute heart failure (AHF), however its precise assessment by simple clinical evaluation remains elusive. The recent introduction of the lung ultrasound scan (LUS) allowed to physicians to more precisely quantify pulmonary congestion. The aim of this study was to compare clinical congestion (CC) with LUS and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) in order to achieve a more complete evaluation and to evaluate the prognostic power of each measurement. Methods: All patients were submitted to clinical evaluation for blood sample analysis and LUS at admission and before discharge. LUS protocol evaluated the number of B-lines for each chest zone by standardized eight site protocol. CC was measured following ESC criteria. The mean difference between admission and discharge congestion logBNP and B-lines values were calculated. Combined end points of death and rehospitalization was calculated over 180 days. Results: 213 patients were included in the protocol; 133 experienced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), and 83 presented with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Patients with HFrEF had a more increased level of BNP (1150 (812–1790) vs. 851 (694–1196); p = 0.002) and B lines total number (32 (27–38) vs. 30 (25–36); p = 0.05). A positive correlation was found between log BNP and Blines number in both HFrEF (r = 0.57; p < 0.001) and HFpEF (r = 0.36; p = 0.001). Similarly, dividing B-lines among tertiles the upper group (B-lines ≥ 36) had an increased clinical congestion score. Among three variables at admission only B-lines were predictive for outcome (AUC 0.68 p < 0.001) but not LogBNP and CC score. During 180 days of follow-up, univariate analysis showed that persistent ΔB-lines <−32.3% (HR 6.54 (4.19–10.20); p < 0.001), persistent ΔBNP < −43.8% (HR 2.48 (1.69–3.63); p < 0.001) and persistent ΔCC < 50% (HR 4.25 (2.90–6.21); p < 0.001) were all significantly related to adverse outcome. Multivariable analysis confirmed that persistent ΔB-lines (HR 4.38 (2.64–7.29); p < 0.001), ΔBNP (HR 1.74 (1.11–2.74); p = 0.016) and ΔCC (HR 3.38 (2.10–5.44); p < 0.001 were associated with the combined end point. Conclusions: a complete clinical laboratory and LUS assessment better recognized different congestion occurrence in AHF. The difference between admission and discharge B-lines provides useful prognostic information compared to traditional clinical evaluation.
When comparing the apnea-hypopnea index (i.e., respiratory disturbance index) of patients treated for velopharyngeal insufficiency with palatoplasty versus pharyngoplasty, we observed an important difference between the groups, with the highest indices in the pharyngoplasty group.
One of the most important diagnostic challenges in clinical practice is the distinction between pulmonary hypertension (PH) due to primitive pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and PH due to left heart diseases. Both conditions share some common characteristics and pathophysiological pathways, making the two processes similar in several aspects. Their diagnostic differentiation is based on hemodynamic data on right heart catheterization, cardiac structural modifications, and therapeutic response. More specifically, PH secondary to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) shares features with type 1 PH (PAH), especially when the combined pre- and post-capillary form (CpcPH) takes place in advanced stages of the disease. Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is a common consequence related to worse prognosis and lower survival. This condition has recently been identified with a new classification based on clinical signs and progression markers. The role and prevalence of PH and RV dysfunction in HFpEF remain poorly identified, with wide variability in the literature reported from the largest clinical trials. Different parenchymal and vascular alterations affect the two diseases. Capillaries and arteriole vasoconstriction, vascular obliteration, and pulmonary blood fluid redistribution from the basal to the apical district are typical manifestations of type 1 PH. Conversely, PH related to HFpEF is primarily due to an increase of venules/capillaries parietal fibrosis, extracellular matrix deposition, and myocyte hypertrophy with a secondary “arteriolarization” of the vessels. Since the development of structural changes and the therapeutic target substantially differ, a better understanding of pathobiological processes underneath PH-HFpEF, and the identification of potential maladaptive RV mechanisms with an appropriate diagnostic tool, become mandatory in order to distinguish and manage these two similar forms of pulmonary hypertension.
The echocardiogram is the preferred procedure in confirming the diagnosis and characterizing PDA. Doppler echocardiography proved more efficient than clinical examination in grading PDA and becomes essential in the evaluation of clinically significant ductal shunting. Four patterns of PDA shunt can be identified using pulsed Doppler echocardiography: pulmonary hypertension, growing pattern, pulsatile pattern, closing pattern. In this review we confirm that echocardiography can provide a reasonable as well as accurate prediction of the development of later clinically significant PDA by a combination of variables that are easy to measure and compare.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.