{"title":"评估左心室重构的现代机会","authors":"V. Syvolap, A. Bohun","doi":"10.14739/2310-1210.2023.4.277403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To compare the results of distributing left ventricular (LV) remodeling patterns according to two classifications and identify their advantages and disadvantages.\nMaterials and methods. The study involved 2019 patients, aged from 18 to 94 years with a mean of 57.6 ± 16.4 years, 51 % males, apparently healthy and with cardiovascular and respiratory system pathology. Echocardiography was performed using an Esaote MyLab Seven device (Italy) according to generally accepted standards. The distribution of patients according to four classic LV remodeling patterns and according to the classification proposed by W. Gaasch and M. Zile was studied. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica for Windows 13.0 (StatSoft Inc., USA; license No. JPZ804I382130ARCN10-J). Qualitative variables were given as absolute and relative frequency (n (%)).\nResults. The distribution of patients according to 4 classic LV remodeling patterns was as follows: 53.0 % had normal LV geometry; 10.2 % – concentric remodeling; 15.6 % – concentric hypertrophy; 21.2 % – eccentric hypertrophy. At the same time, in the group of normal LV geometry, 25.2 % of people had LV dilatation. When distributing the patients by remodeling patterns according to the W. Gaasch and M. Zile classification, the following data were obtained: 26.9 % of people had normal LV geometry, concentric remodeling – 10.2 %, concentric hypertrophy – 12.4 %, mixed hypertrophy – 3.1 %, physiological and dilated hypertrophy – 11.8 %, eccentric hypertrophy – 5.5 %, eccentric remodeling – 11.4 %. In addition, 3 more groups of patients were formed, who did not have a terminological definition based on the W. Gaasch and M. Zile classification and, in total, accounted for 18.6 % of the examined.\nConclusions. The missing options of dilated left ventricle should be recognized as a limitation of the classic classifications of left ventricular remodeling patterns. The imposition of additional criteria covering the cavity dilatation in determining the left ventricular remodeling patterns improves the assessment of the patient’s prognosis and contributes to a more individual selection of pathogenetic therapy.","PeriodicalId":23832,"journal":{"name":"Zaporozhye Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modern opportunities for assessing the left ventricle remodeling\",\"authors\":\"V. Syvolap, A. Bohun\",\"doi\":\"10.14739/2310-1210.2023.4.277403\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: To compare the results of distributing left ventricular (LV) remodeling patterns according to two classifications and identify their advantages and disadvantages.\\nMaterials and methods. The study involved 2019 patients, aged from 18 to 94 years with a mean of 57.6 ± 16.4 years, 51 % males, apparently healthy and with cardiovascular and respiratory system pathology. Echocardiography was performed using an Esaote MyLab Seven device (Italy) according to generally accepted standards. The distribution of patients according to four classic LV remodeling patterns and according to the classification proposed by W. Gaasch and M. Zile was studied. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica for Windows 13.0 (StatSoft Inc., USA; license No. JPZ804I382130ARCN10-J). Qualitative variables were given as absolute and relative frequency (n (%)).\\nResults. The distribution of patients according to 4 classic LV remodeling patterns was as follows: 53.0 % had normal LV geometry; 10.2 % – concentric remodeling; 15.6 % – concentric hypertrophy; 21.2 % – eccentric hypertrophy. At the same time, in the group of normal LV geometry, 25.2 % of people had LV dilatation. When distributing the patients by remodeling patterns according to the W. Gaasch and M. Zile classification, the following data were obtained: 26.9 % of people had normal LV geometry, concentric remodeling – 10.2 %, concentric hypertrophy – 12.4 %, mixed hypertrophy – 3.1 %, physiological and dilated hypertrophy – 11.8 %, eccentric hypertrophy – 5.5 %, eccentric remodeling – 11.4 %. In addition, 3 more groups of patients were formed, who did not have a terminological definition based on the W. Gaasch and M. Zile classification and, in total, accounted for 18.6 % of the examined.\\nConclusions. The missing options of dilated left ventricle should be recognized as a limitation of the classic classifications of left ventricular remodeling patterns. The imposition of additional criteria covering the cavity dilatation in determining the left ventricular remodeling patterns improves the assessment of the patient’s prognosis and contributes to a more individual selection of pathogenetic therapy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23832,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zaporozhye Medical Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zaporozhye Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14739/2310-1210.2023.4.277403\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zaporozhye Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14739/2310-1210.2023.4.277403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:比较两种类型左室重构分布的结果,并分析其优缺点。材料和方法。该研究纳入2019例患者,年龄18至94岁,平均57.6±16.4岁,51%男性,表面健康,心血管和呼吸系统病变。超声心动图使用Esaote MyLab Seven设备(意大利)按照普遍接受的标准进行。根据W. Gaasch和M. Zile提出的四种经典左室重构模式,研究患者的分布。统计学分析采用Statistica for Windows 13.0 (StatSoft Inc., USA;许可证没有。JPZ804I382130ARCN10-J)。定性变量以绝对频率和相对频率(n(%))给出。4种典型左室重构型患者分布如下:53.0%左室几何形态正常;10.2%为同心重塑;15.6% -同心肥厚;21.2% -偏心肥厚。与此同时,在正常左室几何形状组中,25.2%的人出现左室扩张。根据W. Gaasch和M. Zile分类,将患者按重构模式进行分布,得到以下数据:左室几何形态正常者26.9%,同心重构者10.2%,同心肥厚者12.4%,混合性肥厚者3.1%,生理性和扩张性肥厚者11.8%,偏心肥厚者5.5%,偏心重构者11.4%。此外,还形成了另外3组患者,他们没有基于W. Gaasch和M. Zile分类的术语定义,总计占检查的18.6%。缺少扩张左心室的选项应该被认为是左心室重构模式经典分类的限制。在确定左心室重构模式时,附加的标准包括腔扩张,提高了对患者预后的评估,并有助于更个性化的病理治疗选择。
Modern opportunities for assessing the left ventricle remodeling
Aim: To compare the results of distributing left ventricular (LV) remodeling patterns according to two classifications and identify their advantages and disadvantages.
Materials and methods. The study involved 2019 patients, aged from 18 to 94 years with a mean of 57.6 ± 16.4 years, 51 % males, apparently healthy and with cardiovascular and respiratory system pathology. Echocardiography was performed using an Esaote MyLab Seven device (Italy) according to generally accepted standards. The distribution of patients according to four classic LV remodeling patterns and according to the classification proposed by W. Gaasch and M. Zile was studied. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica for Windows 13.0 (StatSoft Inc., USA; license No. JPZ804I382130ARCN10-J). Qualitative variables were given as absolute and relative frequency (n (%)).
Results. The distribution of patients according to 4 classic LV remodeling patterns was as follows: 53.0 % had normal LV geometry; 10.2 % – concentric remodeling; 15.6 % – concentric hypertrophy; 21.2 % – eccentric hypertrophy. At the same time, in the group of normal LV geometry, 25.2 % of people had LV dilatation. When distributing the patients by remodeling patterns according to the W. Gaasch and M. Zile classification, the following data were obtained: 26.9 % of people had normal LV geometry, concentric remodeling – 10.2 %, concentric hypertrophy – 12.4 %, mixed hypertrophy – 3.1 %, physiological and dilated hypertrophy – 11.8 %, eccentric hypertrophy – 5.5 %, eccentric remodeling – 11.4 %. In addition, 3 more groups of patients were formed, who did not have a terminological definition based on the W. Gaasch and M. Zile classification and, in total, accounted for 18.6 % of the examined.
Conclusions. The missing options of dilated left ventricle should be recognized as a limitation of the classic classifications of left ventricular remodeling patterns. The imposition of additional criteria covering the cavity dilatation in determining the left ventricular remodeling patterns improves the assessment of the patient’s prognosis and contributes to a more individual selection of pathogenetic therapy.