A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Prevalence of mechanical dyssynchrony in patients with heart failure and preserved left ventricular function (a report from the Belgian Multicenter Registry on dyssynchrony). | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

The present study evaluated the prevalence of mechanical inter- and intraventricular dyssynchrony in patients with heart failure and preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF). We studied 138 patients with heart failure (age 67+/-11 years; 76% men); 60 patients had preserved LVEF (>40%). Using conventional Doppler echocardiography, an interventricular mechanical delay>or=40 ms was defined as interventricular dyssynchrony. Using pulse-wave tissue Doppler imaging, the time from the beginning of the QRS complex to onset of systolic motion was measured in 4 basal LV segments. A dispersion of >or=60 ms was defined as intraventricular dyssynchrony. The prevalence of inter- and intraventricular dyssynchrony was lower in patients with preserved LVEF than in those with reduced LVEF (17% vs 41%, p<0.01 for interventricular dyssynchrony, 18% vs 36%, p<0.01 for intraventricular dyssynchrony). However, patients with preserved LVEF and a QRS width>or=120 ms had higher values for the parameters for inter- and intraventricular dyssynchrony than patients with a QRS width<120 ms (interventricular mechanical delay 33+/-20 vs 20+/-16 ms, p<0.05; tissue Doppler imaging dispersion 42+/-26 vs 33+/-22 ms, p<0.05). In patients with a QRS width>or=120 ms, the prevalence of inter- and intraventricular dyssynchrony was comparable for patients with preserved and reduced LVEF (42% vs 55%, p=NS for interventricular dyssynchrony and 45% vs 46%, p=NS for intraventricular dyssynchrony). In conclusion, the prevalence of inter- and intraventricular dyssynchrony was low (17% and 18%, respectively) in patients with heart failure and preserved LVEF. However, in the presence of a QRS width of >or=120 ms, this prevalence increased to almost 50%, comparable to that for patients with heart failure and reduced LVEF and a QRS width of >or=120 ms.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.07.062DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

patients heart
12
heart failure
12
intraventricular dyssynchrony
12
prevalence mechanical
8
dyssynchrony patients
8
failure preserved
8
preserved left
8
left ventricular
8
inter- intraventricular
8
patients preserved
8

Similar Publications