Abstract 12375: Performance of Echocardiographic Measures of Right Ventricular Assessment Against Cardiac MRI in Pulmonary Hypertension - Results From the PVDOMICS Cohort

Abstract

Introduction: Assessment of right ventricular (RV) size and function by echo is challenging due to complex RV anatomy and requires integration of multiple measurements. We sought to compare accuracy of echo measures of RV size and function with cardiac MRI (CMR) in pulmonary hypertension (PH). Methods: We included patients with PH from the PVDOMICS Study who underwent both echo and CMR. Echo measures of RV size (basal dimension, area, 3D volume) and function (fractional area change [FAC], 3D RV ejection fraction [EF], RV global longitudinal strain [GLS], S’, TAPSE, Tei index) were compared to CMR derived RV volumes and RVEF. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman (BA) plots and Lin’s concordance correlation coefficients (ρ c ). Predictive trends were evaluated using linear regression. Results: The cohort included 446 subjects (58 ± 15 yrs, 36% male). Echo measures of RV size showed poor agreement with CMR, but substantial linear associations, when comparing CMR end diastolic volume (EDV) with: echo basal dimension (ρ c = 0.002; β = 60, R 2 = 0.47), end-diastolic area (ρ c = 0.04, β = 6.4, R 2 = 0.64), and 3D EDV (bias = 106, limits of agreement [LOA]: -14.1 to 225); and also when comparing CMR end-systolic volume (ESV) with: end-systolic area (ρ c = 0.08; β = 6.8, R 2 = 0.74) and 3D ESV (bias = 67.3, LOA: -31.8 to 166). Select echo measures of RV function demonstrated better agreement with CMR RVEF including: 3D RVEF (bias -0.23, LOA -17.9 to 17.5) and FAC (ρ c = 0.55; β = 0.89, R 2 = 0.50). Others exhibited modest or poor agreement including: RV GLS (ρ c = 0.11; β = -1.5, R 2 = 0.40), along with S’, TAPSE, and Tei index (ρ c ≤ 0.02; R 2 ≤ 0.19 for all). [Figure] Discussion: In this largest comparison of echo vs CMR measures of RV assessment in PH, echo measures of RV size agreed poorly with CMR, especially at larger RV volumes. RV functional assessment was best with echo 3D RVEF and FAC, which should be preferentially used for echo RV functional assessment. Consider CMR for more accurate volume assessment of RV size.