Left ventricular electromechanical delay in patients with heart failure and normal QRS duration and in patients with right and left bundle branch block

被引:33
|
作者
Badano, Luigi P.
Gaddi, Oscar
Peraldo, Carlo
Lupi, Gabriele
Sitges, Marta
Parthenakis, Frangisko
Molteni, Santo
Pagliuca, Maria Rosaria
Sassone, Biagio
Di Stefano, Paola
De Santo, Tiziana
Menozzi, Carlo
Brignole, Michele
机构
[1] AO Santa Maria Misericordia, Cardiol Unit, Echo Lab, Dept Cardiopulm Sci, I-33100 Udine, Italy
[2] Osped S Maria Nuova, Dept Cardiol, Reggio Emilia, Italy
[3] Osped S Giovanni Calibita Fatebenefratelli, Dept Cardiol, Rome, Italy
[4] Osped Tigullio, Dept Cardiol, Lavagna, Italy
[5] Hosp Clin Barcelona, Dept Cardiol, Barcelona, Spain
[6] St Anna Hosp, Dept Cardiol, Como, Italy
[7] Osped S Giuseppe Moscati, Dept Cardiol, Avellino, Italy
来源
EUROPACE | 2007年 / 9卷 / 01期
关键词
bundle branch block; heart failure; echocardiography; electromechanical synchronicity; left ventricular dyssynchrony; tissue Doppler imaging;
D O I
10.1093/europace/eul144
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims We sought to define the reference values of intra-left ventricular (LV) electromechanical delay (EMD), and to assess the prevalence (and pattern) of intra-LV dyssynchrony in patients with heart failure (HF) and normal QRS and in patients with right and left bundle branch block. Methods and results We used tissue Doppler imaging echocardiography and a six-LV watt model to study LV EMD in 103 patients [41 with HF and normal QRS, 22 with right bundle branch block (RBBB), and 40 with left bundle branch block (LBBB)], and in 59 controls. In controls, the median intra-LV EMD was 17 ms, (inter-quartile range 13-30); 95% of controls had a value <= 41 ms. Patients showed a longer intra-LV EMD than controls: 33 ms (20-57) in patients with normal QRS, 32 ms (23-50) in RBBB patients, and 50 ms (30-94) in LBBB patients. Intra-LV dyssynchrony (defined as intra-LV EMD > 41 ms) was present in 39, 36, and 60% of the patients, respectively. On average, HF patients showed the same pattern of activation as controls, from the septum to the posterior watt, but activation times were significantly prolonged. In RBBB patients the activation sequence was directed from inferior to anterior and in LBBB from anterior to inferior watt. Conclusions Left ventricular dyssynchrony was present in several patients with HF and normal QRS, and in patients with RBBB; conversely, 40% of LBBB patients showed values of LV EMD within the normal range. Left ventricular activation sequence was different between groups. Assessment of LV synchronicity by means of imaging techniques may be more important than QRS duration or morphology in selecting patients for cardiac resynchronization treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:41 / 47
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Left ventricular electromechanical delay in patients with heart failure and normal QRS duration and in patients with right and left bundle branch block (vol 9, pg 41, 2007)
    Badano, Luigi P.
    Gaddi, Oscar
    Peraldo, Carlo
    Lupi, Gabriele
    Sitges, Marta
    Parthenakis, Frangisko
    Molteni, Santo
    Pagliuca, Maria Rosaria
    Sassone, Biagio
    Di Stefano, Paola
    De Santo, Tiziana
    Menozzi, Carlo
    Brignole, Michele
    EUROPACE, 2007, 9 (06): : 447 - 447
  • [2] QRS duration in left bundle branch block does not affect left ventricular twisting in chronic systolic heart failure
    Attana, Paola
    Perini, Alessandro Paoletti
    Votta, Carmine Domenico
    Cappelli, Francesco
    Pieragnoli, Paolo
    Ricciardi, Giuseppe
    Nesti, Martina
    Giomi, Andrea
    Sacchi, Stefania
    Chiostri, Marco
    Padeletti, Luigi
    CLINICAL PHYSIOLOGY AND FUNCTIONAL IMAGING, 2015, 35 (06) : 436 - 442
  • [3] Right ventricular dilatation and systolic dysfunction and relationship to QRS duration in patients with left bundle branch block and cardiomyopathy
    Park, Seung-Jung
    Kwon, Deborah H.
    Rickard, John W.
    Varma, Niraj
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2021, 44 (11): : 1890 - 1896
  • [4] Left bundle branch pacing shortened the QRS duration of a right bundle branch block
    Zhu, Kailun
    Lin, Manxin
    Li, Linlin
    Chang, Dong
    Li, Qiang
    JOURNAL OF ELECTROCARDIOLOGY, 2021, 68 : 153 - 156
  • [5] In Patients With Left Bundle Branch Block, QRS Duration is a Stronger Predictor of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Dilation Than QRS Voltage
    DeBauge, Ashley
    Fairbank, Tyan
    Harvey, Christopher J.
    Ranka, Sagar
    Jiwani, Sania
    Sheldon, Seth H.
    Reddy, Madhu
    Beaver, Timothy A.
    Noheria, Amit
    CIRCULATION, 2022, 146
  • [6] Electrical and mechanical components of dyssynchrony in heart failure patients with normal QRS duration and left bundle-branch block - Impact of left and biventricular pacing
    Turner, MS
    Bleasdale, RA
    Vinereanu, D
    Mumford, CE
    Paul, V
    Fraser, AG
    Frenneaux, MP
    CIRCULATION, 2004, 109 (21) : 2544 - 2549
  • [7] Comparison of Incidence of Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Among Patients With Left Bundle Branch Block Versus Those With Normal QRS Duration
    Sze, Edward
    Dunning, Allison
    Loring, Zak
    Atwater, Brett D.
    Chiswell, Karen
    Daubert, James P.
    Kisslo, Joseph A.
    Mark, Daniel B.
    Velazquez, Eric J.
    Samad, Zainab
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2017, 120 (11): : 1990 - 1997
  • [8] Characterization of left ventricular activation in patients with heart failure and left bundle-branch block
    Auricchio, A
    Fantoni, C
    Regoli, F
    Carbucicchio, C
    Goette, A
    Geller, C
    Kloss, M
    Klein, H
    CIRCULATION, 2004, 109 (09) : 1133 - 1139
  • [9] Variable left ventricular activation pattern in patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block
    Fung, JWH
    Yu, CM
    Yip, G
    Zhang, Y
    Chan, H
    Kum, CC
    Sanderson, JE
    HEART, 2004, 90 (01) : 17 - 18
  • [10] Electromechanical dyssynchronization and ventricular dysfunction are coupled in heart failure patients with moderate to large left bundle branch block
    Toussaint, JF
    Lavergne, T
    Piot, O
    Hignette, C
    Desire, C
    Diebold, B
    Froissart, M
    Guize, L
    Paillard, M
    CIRCULATION, 2000, 102 (18) : 626 - 626