Ben Corteville1, Jan De Pooter1, Tine De Backer1, Milad El Haddad1, Roland Stroobandt1, Frank Timmermans2. 1. Ghent University Hospital, Heart Center, Department of Cardiology, 8K12 IE, De Pintelaan 185, Ghent 9000, Belgium. 2. Ghent University Hospital, Heart Center, Department of Cardiology, 8K12 IE, De Pintelaan 185, Ghent 9000, Belgium frank.timmermans@ugent.be.
Abstract
AIMS: In patients with systolic heart failure and left bundle branch block (LBBB), septal flash (SF) movement has been described by echocardiography. We evaluated the prevalence of SF in LBBB and non-LBBB patients and evaluated whether specific electrocardiographic (ECG) characteristics within LBBB are associated with the presence of SF on echocardiography. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and four patients with probable LBBB on standard 12-lead ECG were selected, 40 patients with non-LBBB served as controls. Left bundle branch block and non-LBBB were defined, according to the most recent guidelines. The presence of SF was assessed by echocardiography. Strict LBBB criteria were met in 93.3% of the patients. Septal flash was present in 45.2% of LBBB patients and was not present in non-LBBB patients. This was more prevalent in patients without anterior ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICMP) compared with those with anterior ICMP (P = 0.008). The duration of QRS was longer in SF patients compared with that of non-SF patients (P < 0.05). The presence of a mid-QRS notching in more than two consecutive leads was a good predictor for the presence of SF (P = 0.01), and when combined with an absent R-wave in lead V1, the presence of SF is very likely (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data show that SF is present in 45.2% of LBBB patients, whereas it was absent in patients with non-LBBB. Patients with SF fulfilled more LBBB criteria compared with LBBB patients without SF. Our findings raise the provocative question of whether the presence of SF identifies patients with 'true LBBB' and whether this echocardiographic finding might be considered as a selection parameter in cardiac resynchronization therapy. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: In patients with systolic heart failure and left bundle branch block (LBBB), septal flash (SF) movement has been described by echocardiography. We evaluated the prevalence of SF in LBBB and non-LBBB patients and evaluated whether specific electrocardiographic (ECG) characteristics within LBBB are associated with the presence of SF on echocardiography. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and four patients with probable LBBB on standard 12-lead ECG were selected, 40 patients with non-LBBB served as controls. Left bundle branch block and non-LBBB were defined, according to the most recent guidelines. The presence of SF was assessed by echocardiography. Strict LBBB criteria were met in 93.3% of the patients. Septal flash was present in 45.2% of LBBB patients and was not present in non-LBBB patients. This was more prevalent in patients without anterior ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICMP) compared with those with anterior ICMP (P = 0.008). The duration of QRS was longer in SFpatients compared with that of non-SFpatients (P < 0.05). The presence of a mid-QRS notching in more than two consecutive leads was a good predictor for the presence of SF (P = 0.01), and when combined with an absent R-wave in lead V1, the presence of SF is very likely (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data show that SF is present in 45.2% of LBBB patients, whereas it was absent in patients with non-LBBB. Patients with SF fulfilled more LBBB criteria compared with LBBB patients without SF. Our findings raise the provocative question of whether the presence of SF identifies patients with 'true LBBB' and whether this echocardiographic finding might be considered as a selection parameter in cardiac resynchronization therapy. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Jan De Pooter; Milad El Haddad; Victor Kamoen; Thomas Tibin Kallupurackal; Roland Stroobandt; Marc De Buyzere; Frank Timmermans Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2017-12-18 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: S Calle; M Coeman; A Demolder; T Philipsen; P Kayaert; M De Buyzere; F Timmermans; J De Pooter Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2021-04-30 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Margarida Pujol-López; Rafael Jiménez Arjona; Eduard Guasch; Adelina Doltra; Roger Borràs; Ivo Roca Luque; María Ángeles Castel; Paz Garre; Elisenda Ferró; Mireia Niebla; Esther Carro; Elena Arbelo; Marta Sitges; José M Tolosana; Lluís Mont Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 1.912
Authors: Ellie Senesael; Simon Calle; Victor Kamoen; Roland Stroobandt; Marc De Buyzere; Frank Timmermans; Jan De Pooter Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 1.468