Key result
Isovolumic relaxation flow velocity was lower in CAD patients with prior MI (24.8 cm/s) vs atypical chest pain (41.2 cm/s) and correlated with LV end-systolic volume index (r=-0.84, p<0.001).
Why the study?
Does isovolumic relaxation flow (IRF) velocity measured by continuous Doppler echocardiography correlate with invasive parameters of left ventricular systolic and early diastolic performance in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization?
Observational (n=89)
Does isovolumic relaxation flow (IRF) velocity measured by continuous Doppler echocardiography correlate with invasive parameters of left ventricular systolic and early diastolic performance in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization?
Effect estimate: r = -0.84
Absolute Event Rate: 24.8% vs 41.2%
p-value: p=<0.001
Isovolumic relaxation flow velocity obtained by continuous Doppler echocardiography provides important non-invasive information regarding LV systolic and early diastolic performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
IRF velocity may reflect post-MI LV remodeling; leaves open its incremental value over standard echo metrics in prospective studies.
Ohte et al. (1999) conducted an observational in Coronary artery disease and atypical chest pain (n=89). Isovolumic relaxation flow (IRF) velocity measurement vs. Atypical chest pain and CAD without prior MI was evaluated on Isovolumic relaxation flow (IRF) velocity and its correlation with LV relaxation time constant (tau) and LV end-systolic volume index (r = -0.84, p=<0.001). Isovolumic relaxation flow velocity was lower in CAD patients with prior MI (24.8 cm/s) vs atypical chest pain (41.2 cm/s) and correlated with LV end-systolic volume index (r=-0.84, p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: