Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 18, 2026

Cardiac Stress Test Induced by Dobutamine and Monitored by Cardiac Catheterization in Mice
Published on: February 10, 2013
Baseline Hemodynamics and Response to Contrast Media During Diagnostic Cardiac Catheterization Predict Adverse Events
Scott J Denardo1, David M Vock2, Carsten M Schmalfuss2
1From the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Duke University Medical Center (S.J.D., J.E.T., C.M.O.) and Duke Clinical Research Institute (S.J.D., D.M.V., J.E.T., C.M.O.), Durham, NC; Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis (D.M.V.); Section of Cardiology, North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Affairs, Gainesville, FL (C.M.S.); and Department of Internal Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (G.D.Y.). scott.denardo@duke.edu.
Background:
Contrast media administered during cardiac catheterization can affect hemodynamic variables. However, little is documented about the effects of contrast on hemodynamics in heart failure patients or the prognostic value of baseline and changes in hemodynamics for predicting subsequent adverse events.
Methods And Results:
In this prospective study of 150 heart failure patients, we measured hemodynamics at baseline and after administration of iodixanol or iopamidol contrast. One-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of adverse event-free survival (death, heart failure hospitalization, and rehospitalization) were generated, grouping patients by baseline measures of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) and cardiac index (CI), and by changes in those measures after contrast administration. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to assess sequentially adding baseline PCWP and change in CI to 5 validated risk models (Seattle Heart Failure Score, ESCAPE [Evaluation Study of Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Artery Catheterization Effectiveness], CHARM [Candesartan in Heart Failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity], CORONA [Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure], and MAGGIC [Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure]). Median contrast volume was 109 mL. Both contrast media caused similarly small but statistically significant changes in most hemodynamic variables. There were 39 adverse events (26.0%). Adverse event rates increased using the composite metric of baseline PCWP and change in CI (P<0.01); elevated baseline PCWP and decreased CI after contrast correlated with the poorest prognosis. Adding both baseline PCWP and change in CI to the 5 risk models universally improved their predictive value (P≤0.02).
Conclusions:
In heart failure patients, the administration of contrast causes small but significant changes in hemodynamics. Calculating baseline PCWP with change in CI after contrast predicts adverse events and increases the predictive value of existing models. Patients with elevated baseline PCWP and decreased CI after contrast merit greatest concern.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview
Cardiac Catheterization IV: Nursing Management
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
Cardiac Catheterization III: Left Heart Catheterization
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Cardiac Catheterization II: Right Heart Catheterization

