Literature DB >> 23703366

Evaluating strict and conventional left bundle branch block criteria using electrocardiographic simulations.

Loriano Galeotti1, Peter M van Dam, Zak Loring, Dulciana Chan, David G Strauss.   

Abstract

AIMS: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is a critical predictor of patient benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but recent studies suggest that one-third of patients diagnosed with LBBB by conventional electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria may have a false-positive diagnosis. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that recently proposed strict LBBB ECG criteria improve specificity in cases of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) /dilatation and incomplete LBBB. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We developed five heart models based on a healthy male with increasing degrees of LV hypertrophy and/or dilation. With each model, we simulated six conduction types: normal conduction, four increments of delayed initiation of LV activation (incomplete LBBB), and complete LBBB. Simulated ECGs were evaluated for the presence of LBBB by conventional (LV conduction delay and QRSd ≥120 ms) and strict ECG criteria (LV conduction delay, QRSd ≥140 ms men or ≥130 ms women, and mid-QRS notching in at least two of the leads I, aVL, V1, V2, V5, and/or V6). Both conventional and strict LBBB criteria had 100% sensitivity. However, conventional criteria falsely diagnosed LBBB in cases with LVH + LV dilated 10 mm, LVH or LV dilated 10 mm combined with LV initiation ≥6 ms after the right ventricle (RV), and with LV dilated 5 mm combined with LV initiation ≥12 ms after RV (48% specificity). Strict LBBB criteria resulted in no false positives (100% specificity).
CONCLUSIONS: New strict LBBB criteria increase the specificity of complete LBBB diagnosis in the presence of LV hypertrophy/dilatation and incomplete LBBB, which is critical for selecting CRT patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Electrocardiography; Left bundle branch block; Simulations

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23703366     DOI: 10.1093/europace/eut132

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Europace        ISSN: 1099-5129            Impact factor:   5.214


  20 in total

1.  Left bundle-branch block contraction patterns identified from radial-strain analysis predicts outcomes following cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Chun-Li Wang; Chia-Tung Wu; Yung-Hsin Yeh; Lung-Sheng Wu; Yi-Hsin Chan; Chi-Tai Kuo; Pao-Hsien Chu; Lung-An Hsu; Wan-Jing Ho
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 2.  Re-evaluating the electro-vectorcardiographic criteria for left bundle branch block.

Authors:  Andrés Ricardo Pérez-Riera; Raimundo Barbosa-Barros; Rodrigo Daminello-Raimundo; Luiz Carlos de Abreu; Marcos Célio de Almeida; Jani Rankinen; Fabio Baeub Soler; Kjell Nikus
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 1.468

3.  Computing volume potentials for noninvasive imaging of cardiac excitation.

Authors:  A W Maurits van der Graaf; Pranav Bhagirath; Vincent J H M van Driel; Hemanth Ramanna; Jacques de Hooge; Natasja M S de Groot; Marco J W Götte
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 1.468

4.  Relationships between electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony in patients with left bundle branch block and healthy controls.

Authors:  Saara Sillanmäki; Jukka A Lipponen; Mika P Tarvainen; Tiina Laitinen; Marja Hedman; Antti Hedman; Antti Kivelä; Hanna Hämäläinen; Tomi Laitinen
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-02-08       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  Validation of an automatic diagnosis of strict left bundle branch block criteria using 12-lead electrocardiograms.

Authors:  Xiaojuan Xia; Anne-Christine Ruwald; Martin H Ruwald; Nene Ugoeke; Barbara Szepietowska; Valentina Kutyifa; Mehmet K Aktas; Poul Erik B Thomsen; Wojciech Zareba; Arthur J Moss; Jean-Philippe Couderc
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 1.468

6.  Prevalence and clinical significance of left bundle branch block according to classical or strict definition criteria in permanent pacemaker patients.

Authors:  Andrea Mazza; Maria Grazia Bendini; Raffaele De Cristofaro; Mariolina Lovecchio; Sergio Valsecchi; Massimo Leggio; Giuseppe Boriani
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 2.882

7.  Clinical Outcomes of Complete Left Bundle Branch Block According to Strict or Conventional Definition Criteria in Patients with Normal Left Ventricular Function.

Authors:  Hui-Chun Huang; Jui Wang; Yen-Bin Liu; Kuo-Liong Chien
Journal:  Acta Cardiol Sin       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 2.672

8.  An electrocardiographic sign of ischemic preconditioning.

Authors:  Loek P B Meijs; Loriano Galeotti; Esther P Pueyo; Daniel Romero; Robert B Jennings; Michael Ringborn; Stafford G Warren; Galen S Wagner; David G Strauss
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 4.733

9.  Comparison of the relation between left ventricular anatomy and QRS duration in patients with cardiomyopathy with versus without left bundle branch block.

Authors:  Dulciana D Chan; Katherine C Wu; Zak Loring; Loriano Galeotti; Gary Gerstenblith; Gordon Tomaselli; Robert G Weiss; Galen S Wagner; David G Strauss
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2014-03-02       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 10.  Strategies to improve cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Kevin Vernooy; Caroline J M van Deursen; Marc Strik; Frits W Prinzen
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 32.419

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.