View an abstract from PHA’s 2017 PHPN Symposium to help you get started on your 2019 submission.
Prevalence of Right Ventricular Non-compaction: Single-Center Experience
Paulus S., Niebauer N., Freichels T., Zwicke D.
Aurora St. Luke’s Medical Center; Milwaukee
Determine prevalence of RV non-compaction in our clinic population.
Non-compaction of the left ventricle, characterized by prominent trabeculae with deep intertrabecular recesses in the ventricle, is well documented. The existence and prevalence of non-compaction of the right ventricle is documented but considered rare. However, in our clinical experience, with frequent detailed echo imaging of the right ventricle along with 3D imaging, RV non-compaction seems more prevalent than originally thought.
We prospectively reviewed echoes of patients evaluated in the pulmonary hypertension (PH) clinic from May 2014 through March 2017.
A total of 75 patients (mean age 65 [range 27-91]; 63 females (84.0%)) were found to have non-compaction of the right ventricle using 3D echo imaging. Sixteen of the 75 patients (21.3%) had biventricular non-compaction. Fifty three of 75 patients (71.0%) had WHO group I PAH, 1 patient (1.3%) had CTEPH, 17 patients (22.7%) had WHO group II PH (5 systolic dysfunction; 12 diastolic dysfunction), 1 patient (1.3%) had WHO group III PH (sleep disordered breathing), and 3 patients had no PH.
Based on our observations, RV non-compaction is more prevalent than originally thought. In our experience, careful assessment of the RV with 3D echo imaging has been the most useful tool to detect RV non-compaction. 3D echo imaging allows detection of increased trabeculae in the RV and differentiation from RV hypertrophy or the normal RV anatomy in patients. The significance of RV non-compaction in patient symptomatology and prognosis is unknown. Identifying RV non-compaction is important in the treatment of PAH patients as it may be mistaken for RVH resulting in over treatment with PAH vasodilator therapies.
Before you submit your abstract, make sure it meets these requirements:
Writing an Abstract for Poster Submission
Your audience will be a mixture of new and experienced PH-treating health care professionals.
Give enough detail to be clear about your message, yet concise enough to stay within the 500-word limit. Use the active voice and third person (do not use I, you, me or my). It may be helpful to start out with an outline and then fill in the detail as you go. Each component may be answered in a few sentences.
The PH Professional Network (PHPN) Symposium Committee welcomes submissions in all areas of practice. Potential topics may include, but are not limited to:
Guidelines for specific clinical situations, implementation of a process to improve patient outcomes or innovative use of technology in clinical practice
Development or implementation of a performance improvement program
Patient safety initiatives
Patient satisfaction improvement initiatives
Identification and implementation of PH educational needs for health care professionals
PH nursing orientation programs, role implementation or development of practice guidelines
Topics are subject to the discretion of the PHPN Symposium Committee and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association. If you have any questions about the appropriateness of your topic, please contact a PHPN abstract mentor by emailing gro.noitaicossAHP@NPHP.
Required components of an abstract:
The Title is the first chance to capture your readers’ attention so make it interesting with a few key details describing your project.
The Author Statement lists all significant contributors with their degrees.
The Purpose (objective) relates why you started the project and helps readers decide if they want to read more.
Tell why this topic may be of interest to the audience.
State your hypothesis, research question or objective.
The Background (significance, scientific merit, interpretation) summarizes what is known about the topic and what the major issues are. Describe the results of your literature review and how they relate to your question. Include other sources of information or expert opinions.
The Methodology (design, implementation) describes how you went about your research or project. This may include setting, population, sample size, selection criteria and measurement tools.
Findings (results, outcomes) include what you found and conclusions you made. Briefly state significant findings or performance improvement outcomes. Include qualitative data, quantitative data and any statistical analysis.
Implications (conclusion) describe the impact of your study on practice, policy, research or education. Summarize what impact your findings may have on current practice and suggest what the next step in research might be.