4.5 Article

Heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction additive value of an exercise stress echocardiography

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jes010

关键词

Heart Failure; Ventricular Function; Exercise Echocardiography; Stress Echocardiography; Longitudinal Myocardial Function; Myocardial Strain

资金

  1. Medtronic Europe
  2. French Society of Cardiology
  3. French Federation of Cardiology
  4. Medtronic, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Heart failure (HF) with a preserved (P) left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) is common, though its diagnosis and physiopathology remains unclear. We sought to analyse the myocardial characteristics at rest and during a sub-maximal exercise test in patients with HFPEF. Methods and results Standardized sub-maximal exercise stress echocardiography was performed in (i) 21 patients from the Karolinska Rennes Prospective Study of Heart Failure with Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction HFPEF registry, whose LVEF was >= 45% and (ii) 15 control patients free of any manifestations of HF. During a sub-maximal exercise test, LV systolic function measured as a global four-chamber longitudinal strain was -17 +/- 5% in patients with HFPEF vs. -22 +/- 4% in controls (P < 0.001), LV longitudinal diastolic relaxation, expressed as e' (septal and lateral walls averaged) was 9 +/- 2 cm/s in patients vs. 15 +/- 4 cm/s in controls (P < 0.001), and RV longitudinal systolic function, expressed as RV s', was 14 +/- 3 cm/s in patients vs. 18 +/- 1 cm/s in controls (P = 0.03). LV afterload (arterial elastance) was 2.7 +/- 1 mmHg/mL and was correlated with a decrease in LV longitudinal strain (R = 0.51, P < 0.01) during exercise. Conclusion The assessment of longitudinal systolic and diastolic LV and RV functions is valuable during a sub-maximal exercise stress echocardiography to confirm the heart dysfunction related to the HFPEF symptoms. It might be used as a diagnostic test for difficult clinical situations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据