Echocardiographic predictors of right ventricular failure following left ventricular assist device implantation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Shruti Rajendra, Yousuf Salmasi, Espeed Khoshbin
{"title":"Echocardiographic predictors of right ventricular failure following left ventricular assist device implantation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Shruti Rajendra, Yousuf Salmasi, Espeed Khoshbin","doi":"10.21542/gcsp.2025.35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong> Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a significant complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, with no universally accepted predictors. This meta-analysis identifies the most reliable echocardiographic predictors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>OVID Medline was systematically searched for observational studies reporting ten preoperative echocardiographic parameters in patients who did and did not develop RVF post-LVAD. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression assessed the influence of RVF definitions and clinical characteristics on predictive capacity. Logistic regression modeling identified key cutoffs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine studies involving 2,975 patients were included, with pooled RVF prevalence of 0.30 (0.26-0.34). Higher right ventricular end-diastolic diameter (RVEDD) (SMD: 0.368, <i>p</i> < 0.0001, I<sup>2</sup>: 1.73%) and less negative right ventricular free wall strain (RVFWS) (SMD: 0.931, <i>p</i> < 0.0001, I<sup>2</sup>: 82.9%) were significant predictors. Higher right ventricular end-diastolic area (RVEDA) was also reliable but weaker (SMD: 0.224, <i>p</i> = 0.0282, I<sup>2</sup>: 0.00%). Lower tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) was a strong predictor (SMD: -0.512, <i>p</i> < 0.0001,) but less reliable due to high heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>: 86.1%). Subgroup analyses of TAPSE by RVF definition showed modestly reduced heterogeneity (43.7%). Predictive capacity was significantly better in more stable patients (i.e., no inotropes/IABP, higher INTERMACS status). Logistic regression identified increased RVF risk at RVEDD ≥41.5 mm (sensitivity: 50.0%, specificity: 83.3%) and RVFWS ≥ -11.3% (sensitivity: 88.9%, specificity: 88.9%).  Conclusion: RVEDD ≥ 41.5 mm and RVFWS ≥ -11.3% are the strongest, most reliable predictors of RVF post-LVAD. Variations in RVF endpoint definitions only partially explain the observed heterogeneity, while patient characteristics significantly influence predictive accuracy. Future studies should explore subgroup-specific cutoffs.</p>","PeriodicalId":12669,"journal":{"name":"Global Cardiology Science & Practice","volume":"2025 4","pages":"e202535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13070235/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Cardiology Science & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21542/gcsp.2025.35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction:  Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a significant complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, with no universally accepted predictors. This meta-analysis identifies the most reliable echocardiographic predictors.

Methods: OVID Medline was systematically searched for observational studies reporting ten preoperative echocardiographic parameters in patients who did and did not develop RVF post-LVAD. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression assessed the influence of RVF definitions and clinical characteristics on predictive capacity. Logistic regression modeling identified key cutoffs.

Results: Thirty-nine studies involving 2,975 patients were included, with pooled RVF prevalence of 0.30 (0.26-0.34). Higher right ventricular end-diastolic diameter (RVEDD) (SMD: 0.368, p < 0.0001, I2: 1.73%) and less negative right ventricular free wall strain (RVFWS) (SMD: 0.931, p < 0.0001, I2: 82.9%) were significant predictors. Higher right ventricular end-diastolic area (RVEDA) was also reliable but weaker (SMD: 0.224, p = 0.0282, I2: 0.00%). Lower tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) was a strong predictor (SMD: -0.512, p < 0.0001,) but less reliable due to high heterogeneity (I2: 86.1%). Subgroup analyses of TAPSE by RVF definition showed modestly reduced heterogeneity (43.7%). Predictive capacity was significantly better in more stable patients (i.e., no inotropes/IABP, higher INTERMACS status). Logistic regression identified increased RVF risk at RVEDD ≥41.5 mm (sensitivity: 50.0%, specificity: 83.3%) and RVFWS ≥ -11.3% (sensitivity: 88.9%, specificity: 88.9%).  Conclusion: RVEDD ≥ 41.5 mm and RVFWS ≥ -11.3% are the strongest, most reliable predictors of RVF post-LVAD. Variations in RVF endpoint definitions only partially explain the observed heterogeneity, while patient characteristics significantly influence predictive accuracy. Future studies should explore subgroup-specific cutoffs.

超声心动图预测左心室辅助装置植入后右心室衰竭:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
导言:右心室衰竭(RVF)是左心室辅助装置(LVAD)植入后的重要并发症,目前尚无普遍接受的预测指标。本荟萃分析确定了最可靠的超声心动图预测指标。方法:OVID Medline系统检索了观察性研究,报告了lvad后发生和未发生裂谷热的患者术前超声心动图参数。进行随机效应荟萃分析。亚组分析和meta回归评估裂谷热定义和临床特征对预测能力的影响。逻辑回归模型确定了关键的截止点。结果:39项研究纳入2,975例患者,裂谷热总患病率为0.30(0.26-0.34)。较高的右心室舒张末期内径(RVEDD) (SMD: 0.368, p 2: 1.73%)和较小的负右心室自由壁应变(RVFWS) (SMD: 0.931, p 2: 82.9%)是显著的预测因子。右心室舒张末期面积(RVEDA)较高也是可靠的,但较弱(SMD: 0.224, p = 0.0282, I2: 0.00%)。下三尖瓣环状平面收缩偏移(TAPSE)是一个强有力的预测因子(SMD: -0.512, p 2: 86.1%)。根据裂谷热定义的TAPSE亚组分析显示,异质性略有降低(43.7%)。更稳定的患者(即无肌力/IABP,较高的INTERMACS状态)的预测能力明显更好。Logistic回归发现RVEDD≥41.5 mm(敏感性:50.0%,特异性:83.3%)和RVFWS≥-11.3%(敏感性:88.9%,特异性:88.9%)时裂谷热风险增加。结论:RVEDD≥41.5 mm和RVFWS≥-11.3%是lvad后裂谷热最强、最可靠的预测指标。裂谷热终点定义的差异只能部分解释观察到的异质性,而患者特征显著影响预测的准确性。未来的研究应该探索特定亚群的临界值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Cardiology Science & Practice
Global Cardiology Science & Practice Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书