Comparison of the 2016 ASE/EACVI and 2025 ASE Guidelines for Assessing Left Atrial Pressure in Patients with Normal Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Clicks: 1
ID: 315812
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #80 of 96 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The assessment of diastolic dysfunction in patients is clinically challenging. The 2025 ASE guidelines for assessment of left atrial pressure were published recently and their diagnostic performance need further validation. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the 2025 ASE guidelines for assessment of left atrial pressure and to compare it with that of the 2016 ASE/EACVI guidelines. METHODS: This study prospectively collected echocardiographic data and left atrial pressure (LAP) measurements from 119 patients. Patients were categorized into elevated left atrial pressure（ELAP） (LAP >15 mmHg) and normal (LAP ≤15 mmHg) groups. Both the 2016 ASE/EACVI and 2025 ASE guidelines were applied to assess diastolic function using echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: The 2025 guidelines demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity (86.4% [75.7-93.6] vs. 54.0% [39.3-68.2]) and feasibility (100% [98.0-100] vs. 78.1% [72.2-84.0]) but lower specificity (81.8% [73.8-88.2] vs. 94.8% [88.3-98.3]) and positive predictive value (72.2% [63.7-79.3] vs. 84.4% [68.9-92.9]) compared to the 2016 guidelines. Negative predictive value (91.7% [85.6-95.3] vs. 79.8% [74.5-84.3]) and overall accuracy (83.4% [77.3-88.5] vs. 80.8% [73.5-86.9]) improved modestly. CONCLUSIONS: The 2025 guidelines significantly improved the feasibility of assessing LAP and enhanced ELAP detection rates and applicability while maintaining comparable accuracy.
Reference Key
openalex_W7163330411 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Wanyu Hu, Shiquan Chen, Hui Cheng, Hailin Tang, Chenyang Jiang
Journal European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ehjci/jeag134
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeag134
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.