Why the study?
Does local myocardial left ventricular wall stress differ between normal subjects and patients with coronary artery disease?
Does local myocardial left ventricular wall stress differ between normal subjects and patients with coronary artery disease?
Indexes based solely on the analysis of decreases in isovolumic pressure underestimate the severity of local impairments in relaxation rate in patients with coronary artery disease.
Elevated residual wall stress in infarcted/ischemic regions may indicate underestimated local relaxation deficits; hypothesis-generating for CAD mechanics research.
To assess local myocardial relaxation abnormalities in patients with coronary artery disease, local myocardial left ventricular wall stress was computed in nine normal subjects and in 22 patients with coronary artery disease. In normal left ventricles, the rate of decrease in isovolumic local stress was not significantly different from the rate of decrease in isovolumic pressure, and the residual wall stress at the end of isovolumic relaxation was uniformly low. In patients with coronary artery disease, the residual wall stress was increased both in infarcted areas and in non-infarcted areas perfused by stenosed arteries (43 +/- 31 and 30 +/- 19 kdyne/cm2, respectively, vs 9 +/- 5 kdyne/cm2 in normal areas; p less than .001). The rate of decrease in local stress in infarcted areas paralleled the rate of decrease in pressure (48 vs 49 msec; NS), but in ischemic areas the rate of decrease in stress was significantly slower than the rate of decrease in pressure (69 +/- 35 vs 48 +/- 15 msec; p less than .05). It is concluded that in patients with coronary artery disease, indexes based only on the analysis of decreases in isovolumic pressure underestimate the severity of local impairments in relaxation rate and cannot be used to predict the level of residual diastolic wall stress.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pouleur et al. (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: