左束支传导阻滞性心肌病的发生率和自然病史。

W. Barake, Chance M. Witt, Vaibhav R. Vaidya, Y. Cha
{"title":"左束支传导阻滞性心肌病的发生率和自然病史。","authors":"W. Barake, Chance M. Witt, Vaibhav R. Vaidya, Y. Cha","doi":"10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"September 2019 1 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure, and increased mortality in patients with/without cardiac diseases.1–3 In our previous study of 1436 patients with mild to moderately reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LBBB, the clinical outcomes were significantly worse than those of patients without conduction disease.3 Current data on incidence of LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy remain sparse. We further studied adult patients with LBBB and baseline normal LVEF of >50% from 1994 to 2014. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for this study. Informed consents were waived given the retrospective aspect of the study and the minimal risks involved. Categorical variables were compared with the χ2 test and continuous variables with the ANOVA test. All statistical analysis was performed using JMP software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Only 549 patients who had baseline and follow-up echocardiograms were included out of a total 2235 patient with LBBB and baseline LVEF >50%. Patients who had a significant drop in LVEF (>10%) to less than 50% were reviewed to determine the cause of cardiomyopathy. The study cohort consisted of 549 patients (age 66.7±11.0 years; 55% females) with a LBBB, normal LVEF (>50%) at baseline, and a follow-up echocardiogram. Of these, 134 (24.4%) had a significant drop in LVEF. The baseline characteristics were comparable between patients with and without drop in the LVEF except for sex and hyperlipidemia (Table). Patients who had a drop in LVEF were more likely to be males (P=0.02) and more likely to be hyperlipidemic (P=0.04). The majority of patients who developed LV dysfunction had clearly identifiable causes of worsening LVEF (Figure). It is important to note that patients with other potential causes of cardiomyopathy may, in fact, have developed LV dysfunction due the LBBB. Nevertheless, to limit potential confounders, we did not consider the LBBB as the cause unless there were no other causes. Ischemic heart disease was the most common condition associated with LVEF drop (10%). The cause of cardiomyopathy in the remaining 29 patients (5.3%) was potentially related to the LBBB itself. All patients with suspected LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy had been evaluated with advanced imaging (cardiac MRI and cardiac positron emission tomography /computed tomography) to rule out other etiologies. Patients with possible LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy were more likely to be younger (average of 59.8 versus 66.6 years, P=0.02). Mean baseline LVEF was 56% and dropped to a low EF of 31% at an average of 4.6 years. Of this group, 83% developed new onset of heart failure; 30% died at an average of 7.2 years from the drop in EF. The EF was ≤35% in 24 (83%) patients, with cardiac resynchronization therapy instituted in only 7 (24%). In these patients, there was a significantly greater improvement in EF in those receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy compared with those who did not (mean absolute LVEF increase of 16% versus 4%, P=0.001). The most recent LVEF for patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy was a mean of 41%. RESEARCH LETTER","PeriodicalId":10167,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incidence and Natural History of Left Bundle Branch Block Induced Cardiomyopathy.\",\"authors\":\"W. Barake, Chance M. Witt, Vaibhav R. Vaidya, Y. Cha\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"September 2019 1 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure, and increased mortality in patients with/without cardiac diseases.1–3 In our previous study of 1436 patients with mild to moderately reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LBBB, the clinical outcomes were significantly worse than those of patients without conduction disease.3 Current data on incidence of LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy remain sparse. We further studied adult patients with LBBB and baseline normal LVEF of >50% from 1994 to 2014. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for this study. Informed consents were waived given the retrospective aspect of the study and the minimal risks involved. Categorical variables were compared with the χ2 test and continuous variables with the ANOVA test. All statistical analysis was performed using JMP software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Only 549 patients who had baseline and follow-up echocardiograms were included out of a total 2235 patient with LBBB and baseline LVEF >50%. Patients who had a significant drop in LVEF (>10%) to less than 50% were reviewed to determine the cause of cardiomyopathy. The study cohort consisted of 549 patients (age 66.7±11.0 years; 55% females) with a LBBB, normal LVEF (>50%) at baseline, and a follow-up echocardiogram. Of these, 134 (24.4%) had a significant drop in LVEF. The baseline characteristics were comparable between patients with and without drop in the LVEF except for sex and hyperlipidemia (Table). Patients who had a drop in LVEF were more likely to be males (P=0.02) and more likely to be hyperlipidemic (P=0.04). The majority of patients who developed LV dysfunction had clearly identifiable causes of worsening LVEF (Figure). It is important to note that patients with other potential causes of cardiomyopathy may, in fact, have developed LV dysfunction due the LBBB. Nevertheless, to limit potential confounders, we did not consider the LBBB as the cause unless there were no other causes. Ischemic heart disease was the most common condition associated with LVEF drop (10%). The cause of cardiomyopathy in the remaining 29 patients (5.3%) was potentially related to the LBBB itself. All patients with suspected LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy had been evaluated with advanced imaging (cardiac MRI and cardiac positron emission tomography /computed tomography) to rule out other etiologies. Patients with possible LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy were more likely to be younger (average of 59.8 versus 66.6 years, P=0.02). Mean baseline LVEF was 56% and dropped to a low EF of 31% at an average of 4.6 years. Of this group, 83% developed new onset of heart failure; 30% died at an average of 7.2 years from the drop in EF. The EF was ≤35% in 24 (83%) patients, with cardiac resynchronization therapy instituted in only 7 (24%). In these patients, there was a significantly greater improvement in EF in those receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy compared with those who did not (mean absolute LVEF increase of 16% versus 4%, P=0.001). The most recent LVEF for patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy was a mean of 41%. RESEARCH LETTER\",\"PeriodicalId\":10167,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007393\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

1左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)与有/无心脏病患者的左心室功能障碍、心力衰竭和死亡率增加有关。1-3在我们之前对1436例轻至中度左室射血分数(LVEF)和LBBB降低的患者的研究中,临床结果明显差于无传导疾病的患者目前关于lbbb引起的心肌病发病率的数据仍然很少。我们进一步研究了1994 - 2014年LBBB和基线正常LVEF >50%的成人患者。本研究获得了机构审查委员会的批准。考虑到该研究的回顾性和所涉及的最小风险,我们放弃了知情同意。分类变量比较采用χ2检验,连续变量比较采用ANOVA检验。所有统计分析均使用JMP软件(SAS Institute, Cary, NC)进行。在2235例LBBB和基线LVEF >50%的患者中,只有549例有基线和随访超声心动图的患者被纳入研究。对LVEF显著下降(>10%)至50%以下的患者进行复查,以确定心肌病的原因。研究队列包括549例患者(年龄66.7±11.0岁;55%女性),LBBB,基线LVEF正常(>50%),随访超声心动图。其中,134个(24.4%)的LVEF显著下降。除性别和高脂血症外,LVEF下降和未下降患者的基线特征具有可比性(表)。LVEF下降的患者多为男性(P=0.02),高脂血症患者多(P=0.04)。大多数发生左室功能障碍的患者都有明确的LVEF恶化原因(图)。值得注意的是,患有其他潜在心肌病原因的患者实际上可能由于左脑屏障而发生左室功能障碍。然而,为了限制潜在的混杂因素,除非没有其他原因,否则我们不认为LBBB是病因。缺血性心脏病是与LVEF下降相关的最常见疾病(10%)。其余29例(5.3%)患者的心肌病病因可能与LBBB本身有关。所有疑似lbbb引起的心肌病患者都进行了高级影像学评估(心脏MRI和心脏正电子发射断层扫描/计算机断层扫描),以排除其他病因。可能由lbbb诱发的心肌病的患者更年轻(平均年龄59.8岁vs 66.6岁,P=0.02)。平均基线LVEF为56%,在平均4.6年时降至31%的低EF。在这一组中,83%的人出现了新发心力衰竭;30%的人死于平均7.2年的EF下降。24例(83%)患者EF≤35%,只有7例(24%)患者接受了心脏再同步化治疗。在这些患者中,与未接受心脏再同步化治疗的患者相比,接受心脏再同步化治疗的患者EF有更大的改善(平均绝对LVEF增加16%对4%,P=0.001)。接受心脏再同步化治疗的患者最近的LVEF平均为41%。研究信
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Incidence and Natural History of Left Bundle Branch Block Induced Cardiomyopathy.
September 2019 1 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure, and increased mortality in patients with/without cardiac diseases.1–3 In our previous study of 1436 patients with mild to moderately reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LBBB, the clinical outcomes were significantly worse than those of patients without conduction disease.3 Current data on incidence of LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy remain sparse. We further studied adult patients with LBBB and baseline normal LVEF of >50% from 1994 to 2014. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for this study. Informed consents were waived given the retrospective aspect of the study and the minimal risks involved. Categorical variables were compared with the χ2 test and continuous variables with the ANOVA test. All statistical analysis was performed using JMP software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Only 549 patients who had baseline and follow-up echocardiograms were included out of a total 2235 patient with LBBB and baseline LVEF >50%. Patients who had a significant drop in LVEF (>10%) to less than 50% were reviewed to determine the cause of cardiomyopathy. The study cohort consisted of 549 patients (age 66.7±11.0 years; 55% females) with a LBBB, normal LVEF (>50%) at baseline, and a follow-up echocardiogram. Of these, 134 (24.4%) had a significant drop in LVEF. The baseline characteristics were comparable between patients with and without drop in the LVEF except for sex and hyperlipidemia (Table). Patients who had a drop in LVEF were more likely to be males (P=0.02) and more likely to be hyperlipidemic (P=0.04). The majority of patients who developed LV dysfunction had clearly identifiable causes of worsening LVEF (Figure). It is important to note that patients with other potential causes of cardiomyopathy may, in fact, have developed LV dysfunction due the LBBB. Nevertheless, to limit potential confounders, we did not consider the LBBB as the cause unless there were no other causes. Ischemic heart disease was the most common condition associated with LVEF drop (10%). The cause of cardiomyopathy in the remaining 29 patients (5.3%) was potentially related to the LBBB itself. All patients with suspected LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy had been evaluated with advanced imaging (cardiac MRI and cardiac positron emission tomography /computed tomography) to rule out other etiologies. Patients with possible LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy were more likely to be younger (average of 59.8 versus 66.6 years, P=0.02). Mean baseline LVEF was 56% and dropped to a low EF of 31% at an average of 4.6 years. Of this group, 83% developed new onset of heart failure; 30% died at an average of 7.2 years from the drop in EF. The EF was ≤35% in 24 (83%) patients, with cardiac resynchronization therapy instituted in only 7 (24%). In these patients, there was a significantly greater improvement in EF in those receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy compared with those who did not (mean absolute LVEF increase of 16% versus 4%, P=0.001). The most recent LVEF for patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy was a mean of 41%. RESEARCH LETTER
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Coronary Sinus Metabolite 12,13-diHOME Is a Novel Biomarker for Left Atrial Remodeling in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Impact of Contact Force on Pulsed Field Ablation Outcomes Using Focal Point Catheter Characteristics of Right-Sided Accessory Pathways Associated With Right Cardiac Veins Prognostic Impact of Sinus Rhythm in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Separating Rhythm Outcomes From Randomized Strategy Findings From the CABANA Trial Trends Favoring an Anatomical Approach to Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias Originating From the Left Ventricular Summit
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1