EVALUATION OF THE PATIENT WITH SHORTNESS OF BREATH: AN EVIDENCE BASED APPROACH

Chronic dyspnea may result from a variety of disorders of cardiovascular, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, neuromuscular, systemic, and psychogenic etiology. This article discusses guidelines for the initial imaging of six variants for chronic dyspnea of noncardiovascular origin: (1) Chronic dyspnea of unclear etiology; (2) Chronic dyspnea with suspected chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; (3) Chronic dyspnea with suspected central airways disease; (4) Chronic dyspnea with suspected interstitial lung disease; (5) Chronic dyspnea with suspected disease of the pleura or chest wall; and (6) Chronic dyspnea with suspected diaphragm dysfunction.

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Dyspnea is a frequently reported and highly distressing symptom for persons nearing end of life, affecting the quality of living and dying.

This study described health and clinical characteristics of persons experiencing dyspnea who receive palliative home care services and identified factors affecting change in dyspnea over time.

Anonymized assessments (N = 6655 baseline; 959 follow-up) from the interRAI palliative care assessment instrument (interRAI PC) were collected during pilot implementation (2006–2011). Triggering of the interRAI PC dyspnea clinical assessment protocol was used to indicate presence of dyspnea. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses described risk and protective factors for developing new dyspnea and for recovery from dyspnea at follow-up.

At baseline, 44.9% of persons exhibited dyspnea. Dyspnea was more prevalent among older adults, males, persons with shortened prognoses, and persons without cancer. Persons with dyspnea were more likely to experience functional impairment, moderate cognitive impairment, fatigue, weight loss, and urinary incontinence. Among persons with dyspnea at baseline, 31.5% recovered from dyspnea at follow-up. In contrast, 31% of persons without dyspnea at baseline reported new dyspnea at follow-up. Risk factors for developing new dyspnea included smoking, fatigue, and receiving oxygen therapy.

Results highlight that dyspnea is not inevitable as persons progress toward death. Accordingly, dyspnea should be identified and prioritized during the care planning process. Integrated approaches using the interRAI PC dyspnea clinical assessment protocol may assist clinicians to make informed decisions addressing dyspnea at the person-level and thereby improve quality of life at the end of life.

Dyspnea, “a subjective experience of breathing discomfort that consists of qualitatively distinct sensations that vary in intensity,” is an important and challenging complaint associated with a wide variety of adverse clinical outcomes, including hospitalizations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiac mortality. Although up to 85% of cases are caused by asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, interstitial lung disease, pneumonia, cardiac ischemia, congestive heart failure, or psychogenic disorders, a systematic approach can help to identity uncommon, but important, causes of dyspnea. In this review that includes clinical examples as well as a didactic review of currently available information, we suggest a step-wise approach to the evaluation of the adult patient with dyspnea. It is also important to avoid 3 possible pitfalls: accepting a cause for dyspnea in which the element identified is only part of a syndrome which includes that element; accepting a single cause for dyspnea when the cause is multifactorial; and failing to recognize a diagnosis and cause of dyspnea is incorrect and has been assumed without rigorous confirmation, when a patient with a specific diagnosis is referred for “failing to respond to treatment.”

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the mid-regional portion of the pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP) for heart failure (HF) in dyspnea patients.

We performed a systematic review of English-language studies published during the past three decades. The performance characteristics (diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy) were pooled and examined by random-effects models.

Five studies met the inclusion criteria, which included 1153 patients with HF and 1904 non-HF patients. The summary estimates for MR-proANP in HF diagnosis had a diagnostic sensitivity of 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88–0.92), a specificity of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66–0.70), and a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 22.89 (95% CI, 12.54–41.77). The area under the curve (AUC) and Q value for the summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curves were 0.88 and 0.81, respectively.

MR-proANP showed a high diagnostic accuracy for HF in dyspnea patients.

The study aim was to determine the prognostic value of a multimarker strategy for risk-assessment in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with dyspnea.

Combining biomarkers with different pathophysiological backgrounds may improve risk stratification in dyspneic patients in the ED.

The study prospectively investigated the prognostic value of the biomarkers N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), Cystatin-C (Cys-C), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and Galectin-3 (Gal-3) for 90-day mortality in 603 patients presenting to the ED with dyspnea as primary complaint.

hs-CRP, hs-cTnT, Cyst-C, and NT-proBNP were independent predictors of 90-day mortality. The number of elevated biomarkers was highly associated with outcome (odds ratio: 2.94 per biomarker, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.29 to 3.78, p < 0.001). A multimarker approach had incremental value beyond a single-marker approach. Our multimarker emergency dyspnea-risk score (MARKED-risk score) incorporating age ≥75 years, systolic blood pressure <110 mm Hg, history of heart failure, dyspnea New York Heart Association functional class IV, hs-cTnT ≥0.04 μg/l, hs-CRP ≥25 mg/l, and Cys-C ≥1.125 mg/l had excellent prognostic performance (area under the curve: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.89), was robust in internal validation analyses and could identify patients with very low (<3 points), intermediate (≥3, <5 points), and high risk (≥5 points) of 90-day mortality (2%, 14%, and 44% respectively; p < 0.001).

A multimarker strategy provided superior risk stratification beyond any single-marker approach. The MARKED-risk score that incorporates hs-cTnT, hs-CRP, and Cys-C along with clinical risk factors accurately identifies patients with very low, intermediate, and high risk.