PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 1, 2006International Heart Journal5 citationsOpen Access

Focalized Contractile Impairment at Hypertrophied Myocardium Proven in Consideration of Wall Stress in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

TYTadashi YamazakiJSJun‐ichi SuzukiRSRyoichi Shimamoto

Key Result

Despite favorable radial wall stress, percent systolic wall thickening was smaller at the hypertrophied myocardium (23.0%) than the nonhypertrophied myocardium (70.5%) in patients with HCM.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=27)

Structured PICO

Does hypertrophied myocardium in HCM have impaired contractile capability despite a globally hyperdynamic state when considering regional wall stress?

P
Population
27 subjects total: 17 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) demonstrating wall thickness ≥15 mm on LV short-axis images, negative T waves ≥0.2 mV and/or deep Q waves ≥0.4 mV, without long-term history of hypertension, mitral regurgitation, or aortic stenosis; and 10 asymptomatic normal reference subjects without ECG abnormalities or cardiac history.
I
Intervention
Cine magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (1.5 Tesla) to measure regional systolic wall thickening and radial wall stress at the hypertrophied myocardium.
C
Comparator
Normal reference subjects (n=10) and the nonhypertrophied myocardium within the same HCM patients.
O
Outcome
Percent systolic wall thickening and the ratio of systolic radial wall stress at the hypertrophied myocardium over that at the nonhypertrophied myocardium.surrogate

In HCM, the hypertrophied myocardium exhibits impaired contractility despite lower wall stress, and the globally hyperdynamic state (high fractional shortening) is primarily driven by a smaller end-diastolic dimension rather than true hypercontractility.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 23% vs 70.5%

Abstract

In hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) a hyperkinetic state is sometimes observed in spite of impaired systolic function in the hypertrophied myocardium. The aim of the present study was to determine the mechanism of this paradox. Seventeen patients with HCM and 10 normal subjects underwent cine magnetic resonance (MR) imaging to measure percent systolic wall thickening and percent fractional shortening. The ratio of systolic radial wall stress of the LV at the hypertrophied myocardium over that at the nonhypertrophied myocardium was evaluated to describe the focal advantageous condition for wall thickening. The ratio was 0.66 +/- 0.36 at the start of contraction and 0.78 +/- 0.31 at early-systole, indicating consistently smaller radial wall stress at the hypertrophied myocardium. Although the condition for contraction was favorable (a ratio less than 1.00), percent systolic wall thickening at the hypertrophied myocardium (23.0 +/- 11.8%) was smaller than that at the nonhypertrophied myocardium (70.5 +/- 32.3%). Smaller end-diastolic dimension (HCM group; 45.2 +/- 4.2 mm, reference group; 48.9 +/- 4.1 mm, P = 0.04) with a statistically identical value of systolic decrease in intraventricular dimension (HCM group; 19.7 +/- 3.9 mm, reference group; 18.9 +/- 3.2 mm, P = 0.60) yielded high percent fractional shortening in patients with HCM (43.5 +/- 7.6%). Although contractile impairment was proven at the hypertrophied region with low radial wall stress in the HCM group, the smaller end-diastolic dimension in this group resulted in high percent fractional shortening.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Yamazaki et al. (2006) conducted an observational in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=27). Cine magnetic resonance imaging vs. Normal subjects / Nonhypertrophied myocardium was evaluated on Percent systolic wall thickening at hypertrophied vs nonhypertrophied myocardium. Despite favorable radial wall stress, percent systolic wall thickening was smaller at the hypertrophied myocardium (23.0%) than the nonhypertrophied myocardium (70.5%) in patients with HCM.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a12b4137b4a43778303a297https://doi.org/10.1536/ihj.47.247
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper