Duncan Alison M, Lim Eric, Gibson Derek G, Henein Michael Y
Department of Echocardiography, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Aug 2;46(3):488-96. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.04.048.
The purpose of this research was to study the effect of dobutamine on left ventricular (LV) filling in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and to determine whether restrictive filling pattern (RFP) at peak stress has prognostic value.
The prognostic value of RFP at peak stress in ICM is unknown.
A total of 69 patients with ICM were studied by Doppler echocardiography at rest and stress; RFP was defined as transmitral E:A ratio > or =1.0, isovolumic relaxation time (IVRT) <80 ms, and E-wave deceleration time (EDT) <120 ms.
A total of 42 of 69 had RFP at rest, which reverted to non-RFP at stress in 24 (EA), but persisted in 18 (EE); 27 of 69 had non-RFP at rest and peak stress (AA). In EA, IVRT and EDT lengthened (by 43 ms and 46 ms), and tricuspid regurgitation (TR) decreased (by 26 mm Hg, p < 0.01), suggesting a fall in left atrial (LA) pressure. The stress response in AA was similar to EA. In EE, IVRT and EDT shortened (by 21 ms) and TR increased (by 13 mm Hg, p < 0.01), suggesting a rise in LA pressure. Peak aortic acceleration (LV inotropy) increased by 0.8 g in EA but only by 0.2 g in EE (difference p < 0.001). Median follow-up (interquartile range) was 34 (20 to 57) months. Three-year survival for EE, EA, and AA was 49%, 79%, and 89%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared with AA, the hazard ratio for EE was 9.5 (p < 0.001) and for EA was 1.9 (p = 0.30).
In ischemic cardiomyopathy, persistence of restrictive filling during stress implies a striking rise in LA pressure, greatly attenuated LV inotropic response, and markedly reduced survival. Stress echocardiography uniquely identifies these high-risk patients.
本研究旨在探讨多巴酚丁胺对缺血性心肌病(ICM)患者左心室(LV)充盈的影响,并确定负荷高峰时的限制性充盈模式(RFP)是否具有预后价值。
ICM患者负荷高峰时RFP的预后价值尚不清楚。
对69例ICM患者进行静息和负荷状态下的多普勒超声心动图检查;RFP定义为二尖瓣E:A比值≥1.0、等容舒张时间(IVRT)<80毫秒、E波减速时间(EDT)<120毫秒。
69例患者中,42例静息时存在RFP,其中24例(EA组)负荷时恢复为非RFP,但18例(EE组)持续存在;69例中有27例静息和负荷高峰时均为非RFP(AA组)。在EA组,IVRT和EDT延长(分别延长43毫秒和46毫秒),三尖瓣反流(TR)减少(减少26毫米汞柱,p<0.01),提示左心房(LA)压力下降。AA组的负荷反应与EA组相似。在EE组,IVRT和EDT缩短(缩短21毫秒),TR增加(增加13毫米汞柱,p<0.01),提示LA压力升高。EA组主动脉峰值加速度(左心室收缩力)增加0.8g,而EE组仅增加0.2g(差异p<0.001)。中位随访时间(四分位间距)为34(20至57)个月。EE组、EA组和AA组的3年生存率分别为49%、79%和89%(p<0.001)。与AA组相比,EE组的风险比为9.5(p<0.001),EA组为1.9(p=0.30)。
在缺血性心肌病中,负荷时限制性充盈持续存在意味着LA压力显著升高、左心室收缩力反应明显减弱以及生存率显著降低。负荷超声心动图可独特地识别这些高危患者。