Revista espanola de cardiologia (English ed.) · 2016
Pressure-volume Relationship in the Stress-echocardiography Laboratory: Does (Left Ventricular End-diastolic) Size Matter?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bombardini Tonino, Mulieri Louis A, Salvadori Stefano, Costantino Marco Fabio, Scali Maria Chiara, Marzilli Mario, Picano Eugenio
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The variation between rest and peak stress end-systolic pressure-volume relation is an afterload-independent index of left ventricular contractility. Whether and to what extent it depends on end-diastolic volume remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the dependence of the delta rest-stress end-systolic pressure-volume relation on end-diastolic volume in patients with negative stress echo and all ranges of resting left ventricular function.
METHODS: We analyzed interpretable data obtained in 891 patients (593 men, age 63 ± 12 years) with ejection fraction 47% ± 12%: 338 were normal or near-normal or hypertensive; 229 patients had coronary artery disease; and 324 patients had ischemic or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. They were studied with exercise (n = 172), dipyridamole (n = 482) or dobutamine (n = 237) stress echocardiography. The end-systolic pressure-volume relation was evaluated at rest and peak stress from raw measurement of systolic arterial pressure by cuff sphygmomanometer and end-systolic volume by biplane Simpson rule 2-dimensional echocardiography.
RESULTS: Absolute values of delta rest-stress end-systolic pressure-volume relation were higher for exercise and dobutamine than for dipyridamole. In the overall population, an inverse relationship between end-systolic pressure-volume relation and end-diastolic volume was present at rest (r2 = 0.69, P < .001) and peak stress (r2 = 0.56, P < .001), but was absent if the delta rest-stress end-systolic pressure-volume relation was considered (r2 = 0.13).
CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular end-diastolic volume does not affect the rest-stress changes in end-systolic pressure-volume relation in either normal or abnormal left ventricles during physical or pharmacological stress.
METHODS: We analyzed interpretable data obtained in 891 patients (593 men, age 63 ± 12 years) with ejection fraction 47% ± 12%: 338 were normal or near-normal or hypertensive; 229 patients had coronary artery disease; and 324 patients had ischemic or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. They were studied with exercise (n = 172), dipyridamole (n = 482) or dobutamine (n = 237) stress echocardiography. The end-systolic pressure-volume relation was evaluated at rest and peak stress from raw measurement of systolic arterial pressure by cuff sphygmomanometer and end-systolic volume by biplane Simpson rule 2-dimensional echocardiography.
RESULTS: Absolute values of delta rest-stress end-systolic pressure-volume relation were higher for exercise and dobutamine than for dipyridamole. In the overall population, an inverse relationship between end-systolic pressure-volume relation and end-diastolic volume was present at rest (r2 = 0.69, P < .001) and peak stress (r2 = 0.56, P < .001), but was absent if the delta rest-stress end-systolic pressure-volume relation was considered (r2 = 0.13).
CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular end-diastolic volume does not affect the rest-stress changes in end-systolic pressure-volume relation in either normal or abnormal left ventricles during physical or pharmacological stress.