4.7 Article

Left ventricular concentric geometry is associated with impaired relaxation in hypertension: the HyperGEN study

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 26, Issue 10, Pages 1039-1045

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi019

Keywords

cardiac function; hypertrophy; arterial hypertension; diastolic function; cardiovascular risk

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims We tested the hypothesis that abnormal left ventricular (LV) relaxation is associated with concentric LV geometry. Methods and results Doppler LV filling properties were studied in 1384 hypertensive participants without cardiovascular disease, from the HyperGEN population (731 women, 784 obese, 236 diabetic) and compared in four LV geometry groups; normal, concentric remodelling (3.5%), eccentric (23%), and concentric LV hypertrophy (4%), based on echocardiographic LV mass index (in g/m(2.7)). Abnormal LV relaxation was identified by European Society of Cardiology criteria in 275 subjects (20%). After accounting for significant confounders, E/A ratio and isovolumic relaxation time were not related to the presence of LV hypertrophy, but indicated abnormal relaxation when LV geometry was concentric (both P < 0.0001). Deceleration time of E velocity was prolonged with LV hypertrophy (P < 0.03), but the behaviour in relation to concentric LV geometry differed in the presence (prolonged) or absence (reduced) of LV hypertrophy (P = 0.05), a difference independently related to the magnitude of both transmitral gradients and stroke volume (all P < 0.05). Logistic regression showed that, compared with normal LV geometry, the odds of abnormal LV relaxation was 2.3-fold greater when LV geometry was concentric and that LV hypertrophy conferred a borderline higher risk than normal LV mass. Conclusions In hypertensive individuals without prevalent cardiovascular disease from a multi-ethnic population-based sample, delayed LV relaxation is independently associated with concentric LV geometry.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available