Assessment of Right Ventricular Function in the Research Setting: Knowledge Gaps and Pathways Forward. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular (RV) adaptation to acute and chronic pulmonary hypertensive syndromes is a significant determinant of short- and long-term outcomes. Although remarkable progress has been made in the understanding of RV function and failure since the meeting of the NIH Working Group on Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Right Heart Failure in 2005, significant gaps remain at many levels in the understanding of cellular and molecular mechanisms of RV responses to pressure and volume overload, in the validation of diagnostic modalities, and in the development of evidence-based therapies. METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group of 20 international experts from the American Thoracic Society Assemblies on Pulmonary Circulation and Critical Care, as well as external content experts, reviewed the literature, identified important knowledge gaps, and provided recommendations. RESULTS: This document reviews the knowledge in the field of RV failure, identifies and prioritizes the most pertinent research gaps, and provides a prioritized pathway for addressing these preclinical and clinical questions. The group identified knowledge gaps and research opportunities in three major topic areas: 1) optimizing the methodology to assess RV function in acute and chronic conditions in preclinical models, human studies, and clinical trials; 2) analyzing advanced RV hemodynamic parameters at rest and in response to exercise; and 3) deciphering the underlying molecular and pathogenic mechanisms of RV function and failure in diverse pulmonary hypertension syndromes. CONCLUSIONS: This statement provides a roadmap to further advance the state of knowledge, with the ultimate goal of developing RV-targeted therapies for patients with RV failure of any etiology

Minimally invasive, patient specific, beat-by-beat estimation of left ventricular time varying elastance.

peer reviewedBACKGROUND: The aim of this paper was to establish a minimally invasive method for deriving the left ventricular time varying elastance (TVE) curve beat-by-beat, the monitoring of which's inter-beat evolution could add significant new data and insight to improve diagnosis and treatment. The method developed uses the clinically available inputs of aortic pressure, heart rate and baseline end-systolic volume (via echocardiography) to determine the outputs of left ventricular pressure, volume and dead space volume, and thus the TVE curve. This approach avoids directly assuming the shape of the TVE curve, allowing more effective capture of intra- and inter-patient variability. RESULTS: The resulting TVE curve was experimentally validated against the TVE curve as derived from experimentally measured left ventricular pressure and volume in animal models, a data set encompassing 46,318 heartbeats across 5 Pietrain pigs. This simulated TVE curve was able to effectively approximate the measured TVE curve, with an overall median absolute error of 11.4% and overall median signed error of -2.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of clinically available inputs means there is potential for real-time implementation of the method at the patient bedside. Thus the method could be used to provide additional, patient specific information on intra- and inter-beat variation in heart function

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Volume status and volume responsiveness in postoperative cardiac surgical patients: An observational, multicentre cohort study

International audienceBackground: The best strategy to identify patients in whom fluid loading increases cardiac output (CO) following cardiac surgery remains debated. This study examined the utility of a calculated mean systemic filling pressure analogue (Pmsa) and derived variables to explain the response to a fluid bolus. Methods: The Pmsa was calculated using retrospective, observational cohort data in the early postoperative period between admission to the intensive care unit and extubation within 6 hours. The venous return pressure gradient (VRdP) was calculated as Pmsa − central venous pressure. Concurrent changes induced by a fluid bolus in the ratio of the VRdP over Pmsa, the volume efficiency (Evol), were studied to assess fluid responsiveness. Changes between Pmsa and derived variables and CO were analysed by Wilcoxon rank-sum test, hierarchial clustering and multiple linear regression. Results: Data were analysed for 235 patients who received 489 fluid boluses. The Pmsa increased with consecutive fluid boluses (median difference [range] 1.3 [0.5-2.4] mm Hg, P =.03) with a corresponding increase in VRdP (median difference 0.4 [0.2-0.6] mm Hg, P =.04). Hierarchical cluster analysis only identified Evol and the change in CO within one cluster. The multiple linear regression between Pmsa and its derived variables and the change in CO (overall r2 =.48, P <.001) demonstrated the best partial regression between the continuous change in CO and the concurrent Evol (r =.55, P <.001). Conclusion: The mean systemic filling Pmsa enabled a comprehensive interpretation of fluid responsiveness with volume efficiency useful to explain the change in CO as a continuous phenomenon