scholarly journals Comparison of the effect of pressure loading on left ventricular size, systolic and diastolic function in canines with left ventricular dysfunction with preserved and reduced ejection fraction

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven J Lavine ◽  
Donald A Conetta
2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Sengelov ◽  
P G Jorgensen ◽  
N E Bruun ◽  
T Fritz-Hansen ◽  
F J Olsen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) can be used to evaluate both the systolic and diastolic function in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, previous studies have shown important inter-relationship between these measures in other patient populations. Purpose To investigate the prognostic importance and inter-relationship of systolic and diastolic TDI measures in HFrEF. Methods Conventional echocardiographic measurements together with peak longitudinal systolic (s'), early diastolic (e'), and late diastolic (a') myocardial velocities from all 6 myocardial walls were obtained from 1065 HFrEF patients. Outcome was all-cause mortality. Results Mean age was 67 years, 74% were male and mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 27%. During a median follow-up period of 40 months, 177 (16.6%) patients died. In univariable analyses, both s' and a' were associated with mortality (p<0.001), but e' was not (p>0.05). Patients were therefore stratified into high/low groups by the mean value of s' and a' respectively. The prognostic value of s' was significantly modified by a' (p for interaction 0.035). In patients with low s', low a' was associated with an increased risk of dying; HR 1.31 (CI: 1.17–1.55, P=0.001) per 1 cm/s decrease. Patients with both impaired systolic and diastolic function as assessed by low s' and a' had over 3 times greater risk of dying compared to having both high measures of s' and a' (HR 3.39, CI: 2.1–5.1, p<0.001) (figure). Having combined impaired systolic and diastolic function as assessed by low s' and a' remained an independent predictor of mortality even after multivariable adjustment for age, gender, body mass index, mean arterial pressure, ischemic cardiomyopathy, pacemaker, heart rate, total cholesterol, diabetes and conventional echocardiographic measures (HR 1.78 (CI: 1.04–3.04, p=0.035) (table)). Uni- and multivariable Cox regressions Variable Univariable model (95% CI) Multivariable model* HR (95% CI) P value HR (95% CI) P value High s' and high a' (n=386) Ref Ref High s' and low a' (n=113) 1.48 (1.07–4.03) 0.24 1.36 (0.69–2.70) 0.37 Low s' and high a' (n=156) 2.26 (1.34–3.81) 0.002 1.55 (0.86–2.78) 0.14 Low s' and low a' (n=262) 3.29 (2.43–5.75) <0.001 1.78 (1.04–3.04) 0.035 *Multivariable model adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, mean arterial pressure, ischemic cardiomyopathy, pacemaker, heart rate, total cholesterol, diabetes, left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular mass index, and deceleration time. Kaplan-Meier curves depicting survival Conclusion A pattern of combined low systolic and diastolic performance as assessed by s' and a' is a significant marker of adverse prognosis for patients with HFrEF, independent of conventional echocardiographic parameters. Acknowledgement/Funding None


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (14) ◽  
pp. 3013
Author(s):  
Juyoun Kim ◽  
Jae-Sik Nam ◽  
Youngdo Kim ◽  
Ji-Hyun Chin ◽  
In-Cheol Choi

Background: Left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) can occur immediately after mitral valve repair (MVr) for degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR) in some patients with normal preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This study investigated whether forward LVEF, calculated as left ventricular outflow tract stroke volume divided by left ventricular end-diastolic volume, could predict LVD immediately after MVr in patients with DMR and normal LVEF. Methods: Echocardiographic and clinical data were retrospectively evaluated in 234 patients with DMR ≥ moderate and preoperative LVEF ≥ 60%. LVD and non-LVD were defined as LVEF < 50% and ≥50%, respectively, as measured by echocardiography after MVr and before discharge. Results: Of the 234 patients, 52 (22.2%) developed LVD at median three days (interquartile range: 3–4 days). Preoperative forward LVEF in the LVD and non-LVD groups were 24.0% (18.9–29.5%) and 33.2% (26.4–39.4%), respectively (p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses showed that forward LVEF was predictive of LVD, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.79 (95% confidence interval: 0.73–0.86), and an optimal cut-off was 31.8% (sensitivity: 88.5%, specificity: 58.2%, positive predictive value: 37.7%, and negative predictive value: 94.6%). Preoperative forward LVEF significantly correlated with preoperative mitral regurgitant volume (correlation coefficient [CC] = −0.86, p < 0.001) and regurgitant fraction (CC = −0.98, p < 0.001), but not with preoperative LVEF (CC = 0.112, p = 0.088). Conclusion: Preoperative forward LVEF could be useful in predicting postoperative LVD immediately after MVr in patients with DMR and normal LVEF, with an optimal cut-off of 31.8%.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document