| Literature DB >> 28814264 |
Quirino Ciampi1, Clara Carpeggiani2, Claudio Michelassi2, Bruno Villari3, Eugenio Picano2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The presence of left ventricular contractile reserve (LVCR) during stress echo (SE) may provide favorable response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure patients. The aim of the study was to perform a meta-analysis of available SE data in this set of patients.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Contractile reserve; Heart failure; Stress echo
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28814264 PMCID: PMC5559857 DOI: 10.1186/s12872-017-0657-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.298
Fig. 1Study selection process
Clinical characteristics of the studies included in the analysis
| Patients (n.) | Age (years) | Sex (male, %) | Ischemic etiology (%) | QRS duration (ms) | Follow-Up (months) | Responders CRT Criteria | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Da Costa A [ | 67 | 70 ± 10 | 84% | 34% | 190 ± 28 | 12 | clinical |
| Rocchi G [ | 64 | 64 ± 11 | 75% | 31% | 154 ± 25 | 6 | echo/clinical |
| Ciampi Q [ | 59 | 70 ± 8 | 71% | 55% | 150 ± 27 | 11 | echo/clinical |
| Lancellotti P [ | 51 | 70 ± 9 | 63% | 67% | 161 ± 25 | 6 | echo/clinical |
| Senechal M [ | 49 | 66 ± 12 | 69% | 69% | 164 ± 30 | 6 | echo/clinical |
| Chaundry FA [ | 54 | 69 ± 11 | 63% | 54% | 147 ± 20 | 7 | echo/clinical |
| Altman RK [ | 31 | 68 ± 12 | 74% | 65% | 158 ± 22 | 24 | echo/clinical |
| Gasparini M [ | 204 | 67 ± 10 | 70% | 43% | 150 ± 25 | 15 | echo/clinical |
| Pugliese M [ | 102 | 71 ± 5 | 64% | 87% | 143 ± 11 | 6 | echo/clinical |
| Mizia-Stec K [ | 129 | 62 ± 9 | 76% | 48% | 164 ± 24 | 12 | echo/clinical |
| Murin P [ | 51 | 62 ± 8 | 75% | 48% | 150 ± 24 | 6 | echo/clinical |
| Mean Value | 78 | 67 ± 9 | 71% | 55% | 157 ± 24 | 10 |
Rest and stress echocardiographic characteristics of the studies included in the analysis
| LVEDV at rest (ml) | LVESV at rest (ml) | LVEF at rest (%) | Type stressors | Dose (mcg) | LV Contractile reserve criteria | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Da Costa A [ | 249 ± 92 | 187 ± 75 | 26 ± 5 | dobutamine | 10 | EF increase >1.25-fold |
| Rocchi G [ | 183 ± 54 | 139 ± 45 | 24 ± 5 | exercise | - | WMSI decrease >0.25 |
| Ciampi Q [ | 176 ± 64 | 129 ± 52 | 27 ± 6 | dobutamine | 40 | WMSI decrease >0.20 |
| Lancellotti P [ | 184 ± 39 | 134 ± 32 | 27 ± 5 | exercise | - | EF increase >6.5% |
| Senechal M [ | 216 ± 65 | 180 ± 62 | 19 ± 7 | dobutamine | 20 | WMSI decrease >0.25 |
| Chaundry FA [ | 108 ± 32 | 87 ± 23 | 18 ± 7 | dobutamine | 20 | WMSI decrease >0.31 |
| Altman RK [ | - | 116 ± 40 | 28 ± 6 | dobutamine | 10 | EF increase >20% |
| Gasparini M [ | 215 ± 79 | 159 ± 65 | 27 ± 6 | dobutamine | 20 | EF increase >5 points |
| Pugliese M [ | - | - | 27 ± 4 | dobutamine | 20 | WMSI decrease >0.20 |
| Mizia-Stec K [ | - | - | 24 ± 6 | dobutamine | 20 | WMSI decrease >0.20 |
| Murin P [ | 227 ± 66 | 168 ± 55 | 26 ± 7 | dobutamine | 40 | EF increase >7% |
| Mean Value | 195 ± 61 | 144 ± 49 | 25 ± 6 | 22 |
Contractile reserve to SE (CR+) and responders to CRT (CRT+) of the studies included in the analysis
| CR+ CRT+ | CR+ CRT- | CR- CRT+ | CR- CRT- | CR+ | CRT+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Da Costa A [ | 28 (42%) | 6 (9%) | 19 (28%) | 14 (21%) | 34 (51%) | 47 (70%) |
| Rocchi G [ | 41 (64%) | 5 (8%) | 2 (3%) | 16 (25%) | 46 (72%) | 43 (67%) |
| Ciampi Q [ | 29 (49%) | 13 (22%) | 5 (8%) | 12 (20%) | 42 (71%) | 34 (59%) |
| Lancellotti P [ | 27 (53%) | 4 (8%) | 3 (6%) | 17 (33%) | 31 (61%) | 30 (59%) |
| Senechal M [ | 30 (61%) | 1 (2%) | 1 (2%) | 17 (35%) | 31 (63%) | 31 (63%) |
| Chaundry FA [ | 29 (54%) | 13 (24%) | 2 (4%) | 10 (19%) | 42 (78%) | 31 (58%) |
| Altman RK [ | 13 (42%) | 7 (23%) | 3 (10%) | 8 (26%) | 20 (65%) | 16 (52%) |
| Gasparini M [ | 144 (71%) | 22(11%) | 16 (8%) | 22 (11%) | 166 (81%) | 160 (79%) |
| Pugliese M [ | 37 (36%) | 14 (14%) | 23 (23%) | 28 (27%) | 51 (50%) | 60 (59%) |
| Mizia-Stec K [ | 62 (48%) | 5 (4%) | 42 (33%) | 20 (16%) | 67 (52%) | 104 (81%) |
| Murin P [ | 22 (43%) | 3 (6%) | 6 (12%) | 20 (39%) | 25 (49%) | 28 (55%) |
| Total value (%) | 462 (52%) | 93 (11%) | 122 (14%) | 184 (21%) | 555 (63%) | 584 (66%) |
Fig. 2Forest plots showing the benefits associated with presence of LVCR. They include the same eleven studies, but in the left panel a fixed-effect analysis was used and in the right panel a random-effect analysis. Individual studies (identified by first author and reference number) are shown on the left, and their corresponding odds ratios (and confidence intervals) on the right. The area of each square is proportional to the weight in the final result. The measure effect is plotted as a diamond, and its lateral margins indicate confidence intervals for this estimate. Rocchi G and Lancellotti P studies used exercise, all the others dobutamine as stressor
Fig. 3The funnel plot displaying log odds ratio against its standard error for each individual study