Literature DB >> 21624542

Differences in cardiovascular risk profile between electrocardiographic hypertrophy versus strain in asymptomatic patients with aortic stenosis (from SEAS data).

Anders M Greve1, Eva Gerdts, Kurt Boman, Christa Gohlke-Baerwolf, Anne B Rossebø, Sophia Hammer-Hansen, Lars Køber, Ronnie Willenheimer, Kristian Wachtell.   

Abstract

Electrocardiograms are routinely obtained in clinical follow-up of patients with asymptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). The association with aortic valve, left ventricular (LV) response to long-term pressure load, and clinical covariates is unclear and the clinical value is thus uncertain. Data from clinical examination, electrocardiogram, and echocardiogram in 1,563 patients in the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study were used. Electrocardiograms were Minnesota coded for arrhythmias and atrioventricular and intraventricular blocks; LV hypertrophy was assessed by Sokolow-Lyon voltage and Cornell voltage-duration criteria; and strain by T-wave inversion and ST-segment depression. Degree of AS severity was evaluated by echocardiography as peak aortic jet velocity and LV mass was indexed by body surface area. After adjustment for age, gender, LV mass index, heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, blood glucose, digoxin, antiarrhythmic drugs, drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin system, diuretics, β blockers and calcium receptor blockers; peak aortic jet velocity was significantly greater in patients with electrocardiographic strain (mean difference 0.13 m/s, p <0.001) and LV hypertrophy by Sokolow-Lyon voltage criteria (mean difference 0.12 m/s, p = 0.004). After similar adjustment, LV mass index was significantly greater in patients with electrocardiographic strain (mean difference 14.8 g/cm(2), p <0.001) and LV hypertrophy by Sokolow-Lyon voltage criteria and Cornell voltage-duration criteria (mean differences 8.8 and 17.8 g/cm(2), respectively, p <0.001 for the 2 comparisons). In multiple comparisons patients with electrocardiographic strain had increased peak aortic jet velocity, blood glucose, and uric acid, whereas patients with LV hypertrophy by Sokolow-Lyon voltage criteria were younger and patients with LV hypertrophy by Cornell voltage-duration criteria more often were women. In conclusion, electrocardiographic criteria for LV hypertrophy and strain are independently associated with peak aortic jet velocity and LV mass index. Moreover, clinical covariates differ significantly between patients with electrocardiographic strain and those with LV hypertrophy by Sokolow-Lyon voltage criteria and Cornell voltage-duration criteria.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21624542     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.03.084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  7 in total

1.  Electrocardiographic criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy in aortic valve stenosis: Correlation with echocardiographic parameters.

Authors:  Karolina Bula; Anna Ćmiel; Monika Sejud; Karolina Sobczyk; Sylwia Ryszkiewicz; Krzysztof Szydło; Marcin Wita; Katarzyna Mizia-Stec
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 1.468

2.  Gender differences in factors influencing electrocardiographic findings of left ventricular hypertrophy in severe aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Shinji Satoh; Soichiro Omura; Hiroko Inoue; Emiko Ejima; Koutatsu Shimozono; Makiko Hayashi; Takahiro Mori; Katsuhiko Takenaka; Natsumi Kawamura; Kotaro Numaguchi; Etsuo Mori; Akemi Asoh; Toshihiro Nakamura; Koji Hiyamuta
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2013-08-25       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  High sensitivity C reactive protein as a prognostic marker in patients with mild to moderate aortic valve stenosis during lipid-lowering treatment: an SEAS substudy.

Authors:  Adam Blyme; Camilla Asferg; Olav W Nielsen; Thomas Sehestedt; Y Antero Kesäniemi; Christa Gohlke-Bärwolf; Kurt Boman; Ronnie Willenheimer; Simon Ray; Christoph A Nienaber; Anne Rossebø; Kristian Wachtell; Michael H Olsen
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2015-02-04

4.  Possible predictive role of electrical risk score on transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes in older patients: preliminary data.

Authors:  Gianfranco Piccirillo; Federica Moscucci; Fabiola Mastropietri; Claudia Di Iorio; Marco Valerio Mariani; Marcella Fabietti; Gaetana M Stricchiola; Ilaria Parrotta; Gennaro Sardella; Massimo Mancone; Damiano Magrì
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 4.458

5.  Electrocardiographic Versus Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Severe Aortic Stenosis.

Authors:  Aleksandra Budkiewicz; Michał A Surdacki; Aleksandra Gamrat; Katarzyna Trojanowicz; Andrzej Surdacki; Bernadeta Chyrchel
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 4.241

6.  Can left ventricular hypertrophy on electrocardiography detect severe aortic valve stenosis?

Authors:  Takashi Mino; Seishi Kimura; Atsuhiro Kitaura; Tatsushige Iwamoto; Haruyuki Yuasa; Yasutaka Chiba; Shinichi Nakao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-04       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Deep Learning-Based Algorithm for Detecting Aortic Stenosis Using Electrocardiography.

Authors:  Joon-Myoung Kwon; Soo Youn Lee; Ki-Hyun Jeon; Yeha Lee; Kyung-Hee Kim; Jinsik Park; Byung-Hee Oh; Myong-Mook Lee
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-03-21       Impact factor: 5.501

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.