A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

[Left ventricular filling and left bundle branch block: an echocardiographic and radionuclide study]. | LitMetric

[Left ventricular filling and left bundle branch block: an echocardiographic and radionuclide study].

Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss

Service de cardiologie, hôpital militaire du Val-de-Grâce, Paris.

Published: June 1992

Left bundle branch block changes the activation and haemodynamics of the left ventricle. In order to evaluate its consequences on left ventricular filling, the duration of the isovolumic relaxation period, the velocities and the integrals of the rapid and slow filling waves were recorded by Doppler echocardiography and the ejection fraction, the peak filling rate and its time of apparition were measured by gamma angiocardiography in 18 patients aged 55 +/- 9 years and 18 control subjects aged 53 +/- 9 years. Left bundle branch block was associated with a prolonged isovolumic relaxation period (104 +/- 14 vs 88 +/- 11 ms) a delayed and reduced peak filling rate and an increased atrial filling velocity at a heart rate comparable to that of control subjects (69 +/- 9 vs 72 +/- 8 beats/mn). Despite these changes in left ventricular relaxation and filling and a reduced ejection fraction (55 +/- 7 vs 61 +/- 6%, p < 0.01) cardiac output was not significantly decreased in left bundle branch block (4.9 +/- 1 vs 5.2 +/- 0.9 l/mn). Therefore, left bundle branch block interferes with left ventricular filling and ejection fraction without decreasing the resting enddiastolic volume.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

left bundle
20
bundle branch
20
branch block
20
+/- +/-
16
ventricular filling
12
left ventricular
12
ejection fraction
12
+/-
10
left
9
filling
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!