Abstract 14855: Noninvasive Prediction of Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure in Patients With Normal LV EF: Comparison of CMR With Echocardiography

Abstract

Background: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was recently reported to predict mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) with the best accuracy in mid-rage or reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF). . There is a paucity of data on the accuracy of CMR estimation of PCWP in patients with normal left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) or on how CMR compares with echocardiography in these patients. Methods: Stable patients with EF of ≥50%, who underwent right heart catheterization (RHC), CMR, and echocardiographic imaging within one week were included. PCWP was estimated by CMR using a previously validated equation where PCWP is estimated based on the left atrial maximum volume (LAV) and left ventricular mass (LVM) as PCWP=6.1352+ (0.07204*LAV) + (0.02256*LVM). Echocardiographic estimation of PCWP was based on 2016 ASE/EACVI guidelines taking into account the presence of myocardial disease and pulmonary vein atrial velocity. Results: Mean age was (54.6 ± 15.2), 58.2% females. There were 33 patients with PCWP > 15 mmHg by RHC and 46 with a normal PCWP by right heart catheterization. The table shows sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for the two imaging modalities. CMR prediction of PCWP had an AUC=0.72. In comparison, echocardiographic prediction of PCWP had significantly higher accuracy (AUC=0.87 vs. AUC=0.72; P- value=0.008). Conclusion: In patients with normal LV EF, CMR estimation of mean PCWP has an acceptable accuracy for detecting patients with mean PCWP>15 mmHg. Echocardiography predicts elevated PCWP with a significantly higher sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy in comparison with CMR.