Pellikka, Patricia A.

Focused cardiac ultrasonography is performed by clinicians at the bedside and is used in time‐sensitive scenarios to evaluate a patient's cardiovascular status when comprehensive echocardiography is not immediately available. This simplified cardiac ultrasonography is often performed by noncardiologists using small, portable devices to augment the physical examination, triage patients, and direct management in both critical care and outpatient settings. However, as the use of focused cardiac ultrasonography continues to expand, careful consideration is required regarding training, scope of practice, impact on patient outcomes, and medicolegal implications. In this review, we examine some of the challenges with rapid uptake of this technique and explore the benefits and potential risk of focused cardiac ultrasonography. We propose possible mechanisms for cross‐specialty collaboration, quality improvement, and oversight.

Background: Heart involvement is the most important prognostic determinant in AL amyloidosis patients. Echocardiography is a cornerstone for the diagnosis and provides important prognostic information. Methods and Results: We studied 754 patients with AL amyloidosis who underwent echocardiographic assessment at the Mayo Clinic, including a Doppler-derived measurement of stroke volume (SV) within 30 days of their diagnosis to explore the prognostic role of echocardiographic variables in the context of a well-established soluble cardiac biomarker staging system. Reproducibility of SV, myocardial contraction fraction, and left ventricular strain was assessed in a separate, yet comparable, study cohort of 150 patients from the Pavia Amyloidosis Center. The echocardiographic measures most predictive for overall survival were SV index <33 mL/min, myocardial contraction fraction <34%, and cardiac index <2.4 L/min/m 2 with respective hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 2.95 (2.37–3.66), 2.36 (1.96–2.85), and 2.32 (1.91–2.80). For the subset that had left ventricular strain performed, the prognostic cut point was −14% (hazard ratios, 2.70; 95% confidence intervals, 1.84–3.96). Each parameter was independent of systolic blood pressure, Mayo staging system (NT-proBNP [N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide] and troponin), and ejection fraction on multivariable analysis. Simple predictive models for survival, including biomarker staging along with SV index or left ventricular strain, were generated. Conclusions: SV index prognostic performance was similar to left ventricular strain in predicting survival in AL amyloidosis, independently of biomarker staging. Because SV index is routinely calculated and widely available, it could serve as the preferred echocardiographic measure to predict outcomes in AL amyloidosis patients.

Background: In women with low to intermediate risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), prognostic detection strategies have been controversial. We present the follow-up data of the SMART trial in peri/postmenopausal women at low to intermediate risk of CAD. Objectives: To determine the value of contrast stress echocardiography (CSE), stress electrocardiogram (sECG), and serum biomarkers for prediction of cardiovascular events (CE) in peri/postmenopausal women at low to intermediate risk of CAD. Materials and Methods: From January 2004 to August 2007, 400 peri/postmenopausal women were prospectively enrolled. All women had detailed risk factor assessment, and underwent simultaneous CSE (Definity ® , Lantheus Medical Imaging) and sECG. Laboratories included brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), atrial natriuretic peptide, endothelin, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein. Wall motion score index was based on a 16-segment model. Abnormal CSE was defined as new or worsening wall motion abnormality at stress, while abnormal sECG was ≥1 mm horizontal/downsloping ST segment depression/elevation (80 mseconds duration). Self-reported outcome data were collected from a mailed Women's Heart Clinic Questionnaire. CE outcomes included all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, chest pain hospitalization or development of typical angina (CP), and revascularization (REVASC). Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR; 95% confidence intervals) were reported. Results: A total of 366 women (54.4 ± 5.5 years, Framingham risk 6.5% ± 4.4%) completed simultaneous CSE and sECG. Forty-two (11.5%) had abnormal CSE, while sECG was abnormal in 22 (6%) women. Follow-up (4.4 ± 1.2 years) was available in 315/366 (86%) women (78% exercise-CSE, 22% dobutamine-CSE). In those who completed follow-up, CSE was abnormal in 33 women (10.5%) and sECG was abnormal in 21 (6.7%). In 33 women with abnormal CSE, sECG was abnormal in 7 (21.2%) and normal in 26 (79%), p = 0.0004. CE occurred in 27 (8.6%) women: 8 all-cause mortality, 2 nonfatal MI, 13 CP, and 4 REVASC. CE occurred in 21% versus 7% of women with abnormal versus normal CSE, p = 0.014 and 38% versus 6% of women with abnormal versus normal sECG, p < 0.0001. Rest BNP was higher in women with CE versus those without ( p = 0.018). Abnormal sECG and abnormal CSE were associated with CE, while only abnormal sECG was an independent predictor of CE (adjusted HR 10.3 [1.9–61.4], p = 0.007). Of the laboratory results, only BNP was associated with CE (adjusted HR 2.9 [1.1–7.3], p = 0.028). Conclusions: sECG and rest BNP were independent predictors of subsequent CE within 5 years in peri/postmenopausal women at low to intermediate risk of CAD.

Advanced imaging techniques, including contrast echocardiography and CMR, provided valuable characterization and evaluation of a boy with an unusual cardiac mass. Imaging features assisted with differentiation of benign from malignant etiology and excluding thrombus. Accurate imaging techniques saved our patient risks associated with unnecessary surgery or anticoagulation. The ability to accurately define size serially assisted in guiding expectant management. He died from a noncardiac cause at age 28, and autopsy demonstrated a hamartoma of mature cardiac myocytes.

Background The impact of diabetes mellitus on the clinical presentation and noninvasive test ( NIT ) results among stable outpatients presenting with symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease ( CAD ) has not been well described. Methods and Results The PROMISE (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) trial enrolled 10 003 patients with known diabetic status, of whom 8966 were tested as randomized and had interpretable NIT results (1908 with diabetes mellitus, 21%). Differences in symptoms and NIT results were evaluated using logistic regression. Patients with diabetes mellitus (versus without) were similar in age (median 61 versus 60 years) and sex (female 54% versus 52%), had a greater burden of cardiovascular comorbidities, and had a similar likelihood of nonchest pain symptoms (29% versus 27%). The Diamond‐Forrester/Coronary Artery Surgery Study score predicted that patients with diabetes mellitus (versus without) had similar likelihood of obstructive CAD (low 1.8% versus 2.7%; intermediate 92.3% versus 92.6%; high 5.9% versus 4.7%). Physicians estimated patients with diabetes mellitus to have a higher likelihood of obstructive CAD (low to very low: 28.3% versus 40.1%; intermediate 63.9% versus 55.9%; high to very high 7.8% versus 4.0%). Patients with diabetes mellitus (versus without) were more likely to have a positive NIT result (15% versus 11%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.23; P =0.01). Conclusions Stable chest pain patients with and without diabetes mellitus have similar presentation and pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD ; however, physicians perceive that patients with diabetes mellitus have a higher pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD , an assessment supported by increased risk of a positive NIT . Further evaluation of diabetes mellitus's influence on CAD assessment is required. Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 01174550.