4.6 Article

Lung ultrasound and short-term prognosis in heart failure patients

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 218, 期 -, 页码 104-108

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.05.010

关键词

Lung ultrasound; Heart failure; Prognosis, B-lines

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause of hospitalization for patients older than 65 years, with a 30-day readmission rate of 20-25%. Although several markers have been evaluated to stratify timing of follow-up after an acute decompensation is mostly based on clinical judgment. Lung ultrasound (LUS) has been demonstrated to be a valid tool for the assessment and monitoring of pulmonary congestion. Aim of our study was to evaluate if LUS performed in HF patients at discharge could predict 100-day hospital readmission or death. Methods: One-hundred fifty patients were enrolled. The anterolateral chest was scanned to evaluate the presence of B-lines. A sonographic score was calculated attributing 1 to each positive (>= 3 B-lines) sector. Clinical, biochemical and echocardiographic data were recorded. A Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between variables and 100-day events. Results: Follow-up was obtained in 149 patients. Thirty-four events were recorded. Sonographic score was significantly associated with events (HR 1.19; CI 1.05 to 1.34; p = 0.005). On average, the increase of 1 point in the sonographic score was associated with an increase of approximately 24% in the risk of event within 100 days. At multivariate analysis NTproBNP remained the only independent prognostic factor. Conclusions: We confirmed that B-lines at discharge are a prognostic marker for hospital readmission and death at 100 days in HF patients. Nevertheless, further randomized clinical studies are needed to definitely support the routine use of LUS in the clinical management of HF patients, in combination or not with NT-proBNP. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据