Why the study?
Does angiographic assessment of left ventricular function predict postoperative and follow-up outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease without clinical heart failure?
Does angiographic assessment of left ventricular function predict postoperative and follow-up outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease without clinical heart failure?
Angiographically determined ejection fraction and ejection rate correlate well with postoperative and follow-up outcomes in patients with ischemic heart disease without clinical heart failure.
May inform risk stratification in ischemic heart disease without overt HF; leaves open need for prospective validation before guiding decisions.
Quantitative assessment of left ventricular function was performed by single plane cineangiography in I3 patients with ischaemic heart disease without clinical heart failure. As compared with normal controls, 7 of I3 patients had a reduced ejection fraction and 'normalized' ejection rate, suggesting impaired left ventricular function. These patients could not be differentiated clinically in any way from the remaining 6 patients who had a normal ejection fraction or ejection rate. There was also no correlation between the ejection fraction or ejection rate and the angiographically determined severity of the coronary artery disease. Though the number of patients studied was small, the ejection fraction and ejection rate were found to provide a good correlation with the postoperative andfollow-up results. All 3 patients who died, and another 3 patients who de- veloped heart failure, had a reduced ejection fraction and ejection rate. In contrast, of 7 patients who remain alive and well, all but one had normal or near normal ejection fraction and ejection rate. Unlike ejection fraction and ejection rate, there was no correlation between left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and postoperative or follow-up results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chatterjee et al. (1971) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: