Impact on Pulmonary Hypertension Hemodynamic Classification Based on the Methodology Used to Measure Pulmonary Artery Wedge Pressure and Cardiac Output.

Rationale: Guidelines recommend using end-expiration pulmonary pressure measurements to determine the hemodynamic subgroups in pulmonary hypertension. Pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP) determinations averaged across the respiratory cycle (PAWPav) instead of PAWP at end-expiration (PAWPee) and cardiac output (CO) measured by Fick (COFick) instead of thermodilution (COTD) may affect the hemodynamic classification of pulmonary hypertension.

Objectives

To assess the impact on the pulmonary hypertension hemodynamic classification of the use of PAWPee versus PAWPav as well as COFick versus COTD.

Methods

This was a single-center retrospective study of consecutive patients (n = 151) who underwent right heart catheterization with COTD, COFick, PAWPee, and PAWPav. A secondary cohort consisted of consecutive patients (n = 71) who had mean pulmonary artery pressure at end-expiration (mPAPee) and mPAP averaged across the respiratory cycle (mPAPav) measured, as well as PAWPee and PAWPav.

Results

The PAWPee and PAWPav were 16.8 ± 6.4 and 15.1 ± 6.8 mm Hg, respectively, with a mean difference of 1.7 ± 2.1 mm Hg. The COTD and COFick determinations were 5.0 ± 2.4 and 5.3 ± 2.5 L/min, respectively, with a mean difference of -0.4 ± 1.3 L/min. The hemodynamic group distribution was significantly different when using PAWPee versus PAWPav, when using either COTD or COFick (P < 0.001 for both comparisons), and these results were consistent in our secondary cohort. The pulmonary hypertension hemodynamic group distribution was not significantly different between COTD and COFick when using either PAWPee or PAWPav.

Conclusions

The methodology used to measure PAWP, either at end-expiration or averaged across the respiratory cycle, significantly impacts the hemodynamic classification of pulmonary hypertension.