Premium
Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy on Diastolic Function: Evaluation by Radionuclide Angiography
Author(s) -
BORIANI GIUSEPPE,
VALZANIA CINZIA,
FALLANI FRANCESCO,
BIFFI MAURO,
MARTIGNANI CRISTIAN,
SAPORITO DAVIDE,
ZIACCHI MATTEO,
DIEMBERGER IGOR,
GRECO CRISTIANO,
BERTINI MATTEO,
DOMENICHINI GIULIA,
LEVORATO MAURIZIO,
FRANCHI ROBERTO,
BRANZI ANGELO
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
pacing and clinical electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.686
H-Index - 101
eISSN - 1540-8159
pISSN - 0147-8389
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00602.x
Subject(s) - medicine , radionuclide angiography , cardiology , diastolic function , diastole , cardiac resynchronization therapy , heart failure , cardiac function curve , ventricular function , ejection fraction , blood pressure
While the beneficial effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on left ventricular (LV) systolic function have been demonstrated, no information is available regarding its effects on LV diastolic function during exercise. Using radionuclide angiography, we prospectively evaluated the effects of CRT on diastolic function at rest and during exercise in 15 patients consecutively referred for CRT. All patients underwent equilibrium Tc 99 radionuclide angiography with bicycle exercise performed (1) at baseline; (2) immediately after CRT implantation, in spontaneous rhythm and during CRT; and (3) after 3 months of biventricular stimulation. Diastolic function was assessed by measurements of peak filling rate (PFR). At baseline, activation of biventricular stimulation influenced PFR neither at rest (1.06 ± 0.34 vs 1.07 ± 0.50 mL/s during spontaneous rhythm, P = 0.9) nor during exercise (1.45 ± 0.62 vs 1.33 ± 0.48 mL/s, P = 0.3). At 3 months, improvements were observed in New York Heart Association functional class and systolic function. By contrast, no improvement in diastolic function was observed either at rest (PFR = 1.11 ± 0.45 vs 1.07 ± 0.50 mL/s in spontaneous rhythm at baseline, P = 0.6) or during exercise (1.23 ± 0.50 vs 1.33 ± 0.48 mL/s, P = 0.2). These observations indicate that the intermediate benefits conferred by CRT on LV systolic function at rest and during exercise were not accompanied by similar improvements in diastolic function .