TY - BOOK AU - Grinstein, Jonathan TI - HVAD Flow Waveform Estimates Left Ventricular Filling Pressure SN - 1071-9164 PY - 2020/// KW - *Heart Failure KW - *Heart-Assist Devices KW - Female KW - Heart Failure/di [Diagnosis] KW - Heart Ventricles/dg [Diagnostic Imaging] KW - Humans KW - Male KW - Middle Aged KW - Prospective Studies KW - Pulmonary Wedge Pressure KW - MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute KW - Journal Article N1 - Available online from MWHC library: 1995 - present N2 - BACKGROUND: HVAD left ventricular assist device (LVAD) flow waveforms provides graphical real-time information linking device performance with invasive hemodynamics. Previous studies have demonstrated a good correlation between the slopes of the ventricular filling phase (VFPS) and directly measured pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). We aimed to validate the utility of VFPS to estimate PCWP and predict clinical outcomes; CONCLUSIONS: VFPS of the HVAD flow waveform is a novel noninvasive parameter that can estimate PCWP. Copyright (c) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved; METHODS: In this prospective blinded study, screenshots from the HVAD monitor and simultaneous invasive hemodynamic measurements were obtained. Each screenshot was digitized and the VFPS was calculated by two independent readers who were blinded to the hemodynamic results. The equation PCWP=7.053 +1.365x(VFPS) was derived from a previously published data set and the estimated PCWP was correlated to the actually measured PCWP; RESULTS: 131 sets of simultaneous measurements (VFPS and PCWP) were obtained from 27 HVAD patients (mean age 55 years, 47% male). A previously proposed cutoff of VFPS >=5.8 L/min/sec predicted PCWP >=18 mmHg with 91.5% sensitivity and 95.2% specificity with the area under curve of 0.987. The estimated PCWP significantly correlated with measured PCWP (R2=0.65, p <0.001) and showed acceptable agreement with measured PCWP. Patients with VFPS >=5.8 L/min/sec experienced significantly higher heart failure readmission rates than those without (0.24 vs. 0.05 events/year, p <0.001) UR - https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2020.01.012 ER -