Epidemiology of perioperative RV dysfunction: risk factors, incidence, and clinical implications

Abstract In this edition of the journal, the Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) present three manuscripts describing the physiology, assessment, and management of right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) as pertains to the perioperative setting. This narrative review seeks to provide context for these manuscripts, discussing the epidemiology of perioperative RVD focussing on definition, risk factors, and clinical implications. Throughout the perioperative period, there are many potential risk factors/insults predisposing to perioperative RVD including pre-existing RVD, fluid overload, myocardial ischaemia, pulmonary embolism, lung injury, mechanical ventilation, hypoxia and hypercarbia, lung resection, medullary reaming and cement implantation, cardiac surgery, cardiopulmonary bypass, heart and lung transplantation, and left ventricular assist device implantation. There has however been little systematic attempt to quantify the incidence of perioperative RVD. What limited data exists has assessed perioperative RVD using echocardiography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance, and pulmonary artery catheterisation but is beset by challenges resulting from the inconsistencies in RVD definitions. Alongside differences in patient and surgical risk profile, this leads to wide variation in the incidence estimate. Data concerning the clinical implications of perioperative RVD is even more scarce, though there is evidence to suggest RVD is associated with atrial arrhythmias and prolonged length of critical care stay following thoracic surgery, increased need for inotropic support in revision orthopaedic surgery, and increased critical care requirement and mortality following cardiac surgery. Acute manifestations of RVD result from low cardiac output or systemic venous congestion, which are non-specific to the diagnosis of RVD. As such, RVD is easily overlooked, and the relative contribution of RV dysfunction to postoperative morbidity is likely to be underestimated. We applaud the POQI group for highlighting this important condition. There is undoubtedly a need for further study of the RV in the perioperative period in addition to solutions for perioperative risk prediction and management strategies. There is much to understand, study, and trial in this area, but importantly for our patients, we are increasingly recognising the importance of these uncertainties.