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: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

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

Risk Stratification of Future Left Ventricular Dysfunction for Patients with Indications for Right Ventricular Pacing due to Bradycardia. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • * A study involving 40 patients with LVEF ≥ 35% revealed that those with mildly reduced LVEF (35-50%) experienced more significant deterioration in LV dyssynchrony during RV pacing than those with normal LVEF (≥ 50%).
  • * The research suggests that patients with mildly reduced LVEF may benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) to mitigate the negative effects of RV pacing, particularly since baseline LVEF < 48% predicts significant LV dyssynchrony. *

Article Abstract

Although right ventricular (RV) pacing is the only effective treatment for patients with symptomatic bradycardia, it creates left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony, which can induce LV dysfunction and heart failure. The current criterion for consideration of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%, but indication for CRT in patients required for RV pacing with LVEF > 35% remains unclear.We studied 40 patients, all LVEF ≥ 35%, who had undergone implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation with RV pacing < 5%. Echocardiography was performed at baseline and during RV pacing. LV dyssynchrony was defined as anteroseptal-to-posterior wall delay from the mid-LV short-axis view using two-dimensional speckle-tracking radial strain (significant: ≥ 130 ms). Patients were divided into two groups based on baseline LVEF: normal LVEF ( ≥ 50%; n = 20) and mildly reduced LVEF (35-50%; n = 20).LVEF and LV dyssynchrony in patients with mildly reduced LVEF deteriorated significantly during RV pacing compared to those in patients with normal LVEF. Moreover, changes in LV dyssynchrony during RV pacing significantly correlated with changes in LVEF (r = -0.44, P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that baseline LVEF was the only independent predictor and baseline LVEF < 48% predictive of significant LV dyssynchrony during RV pacing.The extent of RV pacing-induced LV dysfunction may be associated with baseline LV function. These adverse effects on patients with mildly reduced LVEF of 35-50% and indications for RV pacing due to bradycardia can thus be prevented by CRT.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1536/ihj.16-415DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

lvef
12
baseline lvef
12
mildly reduced
12
reduced lvef
12
left ventricular
8
patients
8
pacing
8
ventricular pacing
8
pacing bradycardia
8
lvef ≥
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!