Due to regional differences in pressures and dimensions, diastolic pressures should be measured at the same level as dimensions when assessing left ventricular diastolic mechanics.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Requires co-localized pressure-dimension measurements for accurate LV diastolic assessment; leaves open translation of regional gradients to human mechanics.
In eight chronically instrumented conscious dogs, apical and middle left ventricular transverse diameters were measured with pulse-transit ultrasonic dimension transducers. Intracavitary apical and midventricular pressures and intrapleural pressure were measured with micromanometers. Both diameters were normalized as a percent extension from the dimension at zero transmural pressure, determined during a transient vena caval occlusion. During the rapid phase of diastolic filling, there was a 2--5 mmHg pressure gradient from the midventricle to the apex. During late rapid filling, the apical transmural pressure and diameter increased more rapidly and reached diastasis 17 +/- 4 ms earlier than the corresponding midventricular measurements (P less than 0.01). The static diastolic pressure-dimension characteristics at the apical and midventricular levels were not significantly different (P greater than 0.30). The dynamic diastolic pressure-dimension relationship was also similar at the two levels and could be represented by a model incorporating parallel viscous properties. Because of regional differences in pressures and dimensions, however, the dynamic relationship could not be modeled when pressure was compared to the dimension at a different level. Thus, diastolic pressures should be measured at the same level as dimensions when assessing left ventricular diastolic mechanics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rankin et al. (1979) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: