Multiparametric assessment of right ventricular function in heart transplant recipients by echocardiography and relations with pulmonary hemodynamics

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveRight ventricular (RV) dilatation and dysfunction are usually present in heart transplant (HTx) patients and worsened with residual pulmonary hypertension (PH). We aimed to determine the ability of different echocardiographic modalities to evaluate RV function in comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and their relations with pulmonary hemodynamics in HTx patients.MethodsA total of 62 data sets [echocardiographic, hemodynamic, and CMR] were acquired from 35 HTx patients. Comprehensive echocardiography, including two‐dimensional (2D) transthoracic echocardiography, speckle tracking echocardiography, and three‐dimensional (3D) echocardiography, was performed. Mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) was obtained invasively from right heart catheterization. The correlations between all echocardiographic parameters and CMR imaging data and the differences between patients with and without residual PH were evaluated.ResultsDiastolic and systolic RV volumes and RV ejection fraction (RVEF) by 3D echocardiography correlated strongly with CMR‐derived volumes and RVEF (r = .91, r = .79, r = .64; p < .0001 for each, respectively). Among other parameters, RV fractional area change (r = .439; p < .001) and RV free wall longitudinal strain (RVFW‐LS) (r = −.34; p < .05) correlated moderately with CMR‐RVEF, whereas tricuspid annulus S’ velocity (r = .29; p < .05) and tricuspid annular systolic plane excursion (r = .27; p < .05) correlated weakly with CMR‐RVEF. Additionally, 3D‐RVEF and RVFW‐LS were significantly decreased in studies with mPAP ≥ 20 mm Hg in comparison to those with mPAP < 20 mm Hg (47.7 ± 3.7 vs. 50.9 ± 5.3, p = .04 and −15.5 ± 3.1 vs. −17.5 ± 3, p = .03, respectively).ConclusionThe best method for the evaluation of RV function in HTx recipients is 3D echocardiography. Besides, the subclinical impact of residual PH on RV function can be best determined by RVFW‐LS and 3D‐RVEF in these patients.