An observational study in Cardiovascular Disease, sponsored by University of Virginia. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2014-05-01.
Sponsored by University of Virginia · Observational
The investigators will generate pressure-flow loops and pressure-volume loops from aortic and left ventricular pressure waveforms and Doppler (desc. aorta) flow waveforms and compare left ventricular to arterial pressure-flow and pressure-volume loops as well as to cardiac power from the USCOM 1A device. The goal of this study is to test the hypothesis that non-invasive estimates of cardiac pressure-volume work (derived from ultrasound-based measurements) correlate with invasive estimates.
Extensive animal work by Suga et al. in the 1980s clearly demonstrate a relationship between left ventricular pressure volume area (PVA) and myocardial consumption of oxygen (MVO2).
PVA can be measured by combining radial artery pressures with ultrasound-derived estimates of aortic blood flow. Because the aorta and peripheral artery compartments are separated from the left ventricle by the aortic valve, the peripheral arterial pressures cannot perfectly approximate left ventricular pressures. However, because the majority of variation in the pressure volume loops is made up of changes in height and width (changes in the left ventricular end-diastolic curve are, by contrast, relatively small), both of which can be readily detected by changes in the peripheral arterial blood pressure tracing, this loss of information may be clinically insignificant.
USCOM, has developed a portable suprasternal Doppler probe (model 1A) capable of estimating left ventricular stroke volume; a unique feature of this device is its ability to utilize both stroke volume, heart rate, and mean arterial pressure in an attempt to measure cardiac power. This device has not been validated against invasive estimates of cardiac power.
Knowledge of MVO2 would be a useful clinical variable but is not widely available. The ability to non-invasively estimate MVO2 intraoperatively would give anesthesiologists the ability to measure the effect of hemodynamic interventions on myocardial consumption of oxygen and, when combined with stroke volume, estimate myocardial efficiency. Non-invasively estimates of MVO2 may also allow cardiologists a novel means of assessing the myocardium of patients with cardiovascular disease.
4,904 studies on the registry are indexed under Cardiovascular Diseases; 919 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 65 is below the median of 573 across 1,485 observational studies indexed under Cardiovascular Diseases.
Browse Cardiovascular Diseases studies →University of Virginia is the lead sponsor of 653 studies on the registry; 134 are open to participants now.
Of its 60 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 41 (68%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Adults 18 and over undergoing elective left heart catheterization
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients undergoing elective left heart catheterization will be consented for this study
Correlation between left ventricular pressure volume area (PVA) and aortic PVA
The primary hypothesis of this study is that the slope of the regression line between left ventricular pressure volume area (PVA, as determined by simultaneous measurement of aortic outflow and left ventricular pressures) and aortic PVA (as determined by simultaneous measurement of aortic outflow and radial artery pressure) is not zero. The null hypothesis is that the probability that the slope of the regression line is different from a line with a slope of 0 is greater than 5%.
Time frame: day of procedure
This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2014. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Virginia