Premium
Intraoperative diastolic function assessed by TEE does not agree with preoperative diastolic function grade in CABG patients
Author(s) -
Harvey Reed,
Chellappa Vivek,
Mofidi Sean,
Scovotti Jennifer,
Neelankavil Jacques P.,
Saddic Louis
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
echocardiography
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.404
H-Index - 62
eISSN - 1540-8175
pISSN - 0742-2822
DOI - 10.1111/echo.15137
Subject(s) - medicine , mcnemar's test , diastole , cardiology , diastolic function , grading (engineering) , retrospective cohort study , radiology , blood pressure , statistics , civil engineering , mathematics , engineering
Objective To compare the agreement of the 2016 ASE/EACVI guidelines for grading diastolic dysfunction (DD) with the most commonly used intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE)‐based diastolic function grading algorithm in cardiac surgical patients, and to describe the contribution of the echocardiographic variables used in the algorithms to any observed differences. Design Retrospective data analysis. Setting University tertiary medical center. Participants Hundred and one patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) at a single institution from June 2017 to February 2019. Interventions Preoperative transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) diastolic function grade determined by the 2016 American Society of Echocardiography (ASE)/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) guidelines was compared to intraoperative diastolic function grade obtained by TEE. Measurements and Main Results Incidence of DD on preoperative TTE was only 19.8%, while 62.3% of patients were graded as having DD on the intraoperative TEE exam. There was grade agreement between TTE and TEE in only 47/101 patients (46.5%). The McNemar test showed poor agreement between the two algorithms (OR for disagreement = 15.33, CI = 4.77–49.30; p < 0.0001). Despite the low incidence of DD on preoperative TTE, mean lateral e’ values were significantly lower on TTE compared to TEE (7.7 cm/s vs 9.5 cm/s; p = < 0.0001). Conclusions There is strong disagreement between TTE and TEE‐based DD grading algorithms. Due to the different echocardiographic variables used in each and the unique clinical settings in which they are applied, they produce fundamentally different results.