Transoesophageal echocardiography current practice in France: A multicentre study

Few data are available on the application of transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) recommendations in daily practice. To evaluate TOE practice based on echocardiography societies’ guidelines, and to determine complication rates and factors associated with patient feelings. Between April and June 2...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of cardiovascular diseases 2018-12, Vol.111 (12), p.730-738
Hauptverfasser: Coisne, Augustin, Dreyfus, Julien, Bohbot, Yohann, Pelletier, Vincent, Collette, Edouard, Cescau, Arthur, Cariou, Eve, Alexandrino, Cécile, Coulibaly, Sophie, Seemann, Aurélien, Karsenty, Clément, Theron, Alexis, Caspar, Thibault, Soulat-Dufour, Laurie, Ternacle, Julien
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Few data are available on the application of transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) recommendations in daily practice. To evaluate TOE practice based on echocardiography societies’ guidelines, and to determine complication rates and factors associated with patient feelings. Between April and June 2017, we prospectively included all consecutive patients referred to 14 French hospitals for a transoesophageal echocardiogram (TOE). A survey was taken just after the examination, which included questions about pre-procedural anxiety, and any pain, unpleasant feeling or breathing difficulties experienced during the examination. Overall, 1718 TOEs were performed, mainly for stroke evaluation. A standardized operating procedure checklist was completed in half of the patients before the examination. TOE was unpleasant for 62.4% of patients, but was stopped for agitation or intolerance in 3.5 and 1.4% of cases, respectively. We observed one severe complication (pulmonary oedema). The mean TOE duration was short (9.2±4.6minutes), but was longer with residents than with more experienced physicians (11±4.7 vs. 8.8±4.7minutes for junior physicians [P=0.0027]; vs. 8.9±4.8minutes for senior physicians [P=0.0013]; and vs. 7.5±4.1minutes for associate professors/professors [P
ISSN:1875-2136
1875-2128
DOI:10.1016/j.acvd.2018.03.014