Daniel J Friedman1, Kasper Emerek2, Joseph Kisslo3, Peter Søgaard4, Brett D Atwater5. 1. Section of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT. Electronic address: daniel.j.friedman@yale.edu. 2. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. 3. Divison of Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 4. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark; Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark. 5. Divison of Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Section of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few therapies improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). If left bundle-branch block (LBBB) is associated with left ventricular dyssynchrony and impaired cardiac performance in HFpEF, cardiac resynchronization therapy could be a promising treatment. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of selected patients with HFpEF (ejection fraction ≥50%) with and without LBBB (normal conduction, NC) and patients with HFrEF and LBBB who were suitable cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates to describe and contextualize the mechanical phenotype of LBBB in HFpEF. Systolic and diastolic isovolumic times, ejection time(ET), and diastolic filling time(DFT) were measured on spectral tissue Doppler echocardiographic images and indexed to the heart rate. Dyssynchrony pattern was assessed using speckle-tracked longitudinal strain patterns. Comparisons were performed using analysis of variance and χ2 test with posthoc pairwise comparisons as indicated. RESULTS: Eighty-two HFpEF (50 with NC, 32 with LBBB) and 149 HFrEF (all with LBBB) patients met criteria. Overall, 84.4% with HFpEF/LBBB and 91.3% with HFrEF/LBBB had demonstrable mechanical dyssynchrony compared to 0% with HFpEF/NC. Compared to HFpEF/NC, HFpEF/LBBB had significantly prolonged isovolumetric contraction time (ICT), isovolumetric relaxation time (IRT), and total isovolumetric time and significantly shorter ET (all indexed). LBBB/HFrEF patients, compared to LBBB/HFpEF patients, had increased ICT and IRT with decreased DFT but similar ET. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HFpEF and LBBB frequently have an LBBB dyssynchrony phenotype, prolonged ICT and IRT, and reduced ET compared to HFpEF patients with NC. The electromechanical dyssynchrony and disordered cardiac timing of HFpEF with LBBB are similar to HFrEF with LBBB. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Few therapies improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). If left bundle-branch block (LBBB) is associated with left ventricular dyssynchrony and impaired cardiac performance in HFpEF, cardiac resynchronization therapy could be a promising treatment. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of selected patients with HFpEF (ejection fraction ≥50%) with and without LBBB (normal conduction, NC) and patients with HFrEF and LBBB who were suitable cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates to describe and contextualize the mechanical phenotype of LBBB in HFpEF. Systolic and diastolic isovolumic times, ejection time(ET), and diastolic filling time(DFT) were measured on spectral tissue Doppler echocardiographic images and indexed to the heart rate. Dyssynchrony pattern was assessed using speckle-tracked longitudinal strain patterns. Comparisons were performed using analysis of variance and χ2 test with posthoc pairwise comparisons as indicated. RESULTS: Eighty-two HFpEF (50 with NC, 32 with LBBB) and 149 HFrEF (all with LBBB) patients met criteria. Overall, 84.4% with HFpEF/LBBB and 91.3% with HFrEF/LBBB had demonstrable mechanical dyssynchrony compared to 0% with HFpEF/NC. Compared to HFpEF/NC, HFpEF/LBBB had significantly prolonged isovolumetric contraction time (ICT), isovolumetric relaxation time (IRT), and total isovolumetric time and significantly shorter ET (all indexed). LBBB/HFrEF patients, compared to LBBB/HFpEF patients, had increased ICT and IRT with decreased DFT but similar ET. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HFpEF and LBBB frequently have an LBBB dyssynchrony phenotype, prolonged ICT and IRT, and reduced ET compared to HFpEF patients with NC. The electromechanical dyssynchrony and disordered cardiac timing of HFpEF with LBBB are similar to HFrEF with LBBB. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Toshinori Yuasa; Chinami Miyazaki; Jae K Oh; Raul E Espinosa; Charles J Bruce Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2009-01-29 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Tor Biering-Sørensen; Rasmus Mogelvang; Sune Pedersen; Peter Schnohr; Peter Sogaard; Jan Skov Jensen Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Patrizio Lancellotti; Luis Moura; Luc A Pierard; Eustachio Agricola; Bogdan A Popescu; Christophe Tribouilloy; Andreas Hagendorff; Jean-Luc Monin; Luigi Badano; Jose L Zamorano Journal: Eur J Echocardiogr Date: 2010-05
Authors: Wojciech Zareba; Helmut Klein; Iwona Cygankiewicz; W Jackson Hall; Scott McNitt; Mary Brown; David Cannom; James P Daubert; Michael Eldar; Michael R Gold; Jeffrey J Goldberger; Ilan Goldenberg; Edgar Lichstein; Heinz Pitschner; Mayer Rashtian; Scott Solomon; Sami Viskin; Paul Wang; Arthur J Moss Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-02-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Niels Risum; Christian Jons; Niels T Olsen; Thomas Fritz-Hansen; Niels E Bruun; Michael V Hojgaard; Nana Valeur; Mads B Kronborg; Joseph Kisslo; Peter Sogaard Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Selcuk Adabag; Thomas S Rector; Inder S Anand; John J McMurray; Michael Zile; Michel Komajda; Robert S McKelvie; Barry Massie; Peter E Carson Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2014-10-10 Impact factor: 15.534