1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Physical Examination for the Detection of Pulmonary Hypertension: A Systematic Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We performed a systematic review to determine whether the physical examination can reliably assist in the diagnostic approach for patients suspected of having pulmonary hypertension (PH). Using dual extraction, two investigators independently searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase for studies that compared physical examination findings with a right heart catheterization, from inception until July 10, 2021. We obtained data from four studies that evaluated physical examination findings in patients receiving a right heart catheterization to diagnose PH. Pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) were calculated for right ventricular heave, a loud pulmonic component of the second heart sound (P2), jugular venous pressure (JVP) 3 cm above sternal angle, and a palpable P2.

          Three physical examination findings had DOR that supports the diagnosis of PH: the JVP > 3 cm above the sternal angle (5.90, 95% CI 2.57, 13.57), a loud P2 (2.91, 95% CI 1.38, 6.10), and a right ventricular heave (2.78, 95% CI 1.12, 6.89). The palpable P2 had a DOR less than one and was not able to be conclusive in diagnosing PH.

          Our systematic review found a small body of evidence supporting the use of physical examination tests in the diagnostic evaluation of pulmonary hypertension. The JVP > 3 cm above the sternal angle was the most accurate physical examination sign for the diagnosis of PH. Larger cohort studies using a combination of tests may shed more light on the role of the physical examination in the diagnosis and early detection of pulmonary hypertension.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

          Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.

            The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly, authors face novel challenges for conducting and reporting their reviews. This extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement was developed specifically to improve the reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses. A group of experts participated in a systematic review, Delphi survey, and face-to-face discussion and consensus meeting to establish new checklist items for this extension statement. Current PRISMA items were also clarified. A modified, 32-item PRISMA extension checklist was developed to address what the group considered to be immediately relevant to the reporting of network meta-analyses. This document presents the extension and provides examples of good reporting, as well as elaborations regarding the rationale for new checklist items and the modification of previously existing items from the PRISMA statement. It also highlights educational information related to key considerations in the practice of network meta-analysis. The target audience includes authors and readers of network meta-analyses, as well as journal editors and peer reviewers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              2015 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension: The Joint Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS): Endorsed by: Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC), International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT).

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cureus
                Cureus
                2168-8184
                Cureus
                Cureus (Palo Alto (CA) )
                2168-8184
                16 September 2021
                September 2021
                : 13
                : 9
                : e18020
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Internal Medicine, Saint Joseph Mercy Ann Arbor Hospital, Ann Arbor, USA
                [2 ] Cardiovascular Medicine, Memorial Healthcare System, Hollywood, USA
                [3 ] Pulmonary and Critical Care, Ascension Macomb-Oakland Hospital, Warren, USA
                [4 ] Statistics, Saint Joseph Mercy Ann Arbor Hospital, Ann Arbor, USA
                [5 ] Cardiology, Tower Health Medical Group, West Reading, USA
                [6 ] Pulmonary and Critical Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, USA
                Author notes
                Article
                10.7759/cureus.18020
                8523183
                97e9e3da-cdc5-4bfe-a20c-abfc21f2c3f5
                Copyright © 2021, Shellenberger et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 7 September 2021
                Categories
                Cardiology
                Pulmonology
                Epidemiology/Public Health

                pulmonary hypertension,physical examination,clinical diagnosis,systematic review and meta analysis,evidence base medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article