0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Comparison between End-Systolic Pressure-Volume and End-Systolic Wall Stress in Determining Left Ventricular Contractility with Increased Afterload

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study compared end-systolic pressure-volume relationship (P/V) versus wall stress index (WS) as a tool for the evaluation of ventricular contractile state during upright isometric exercise. Both indices of contractility exhibit significant (p < 0.001) increase during exercise compared to resting values. The correlation coefficients for the two indices of contractility were r = -0.45 for exercise and r = -0.70 for rest. Both were significant at the p < 0.01 level. The correlation of the difference scores between rest and exercise as computed by both indices was low (-0.20) and insignificant. These data suggest that changes in contractility from rest to exercise as measured by one index do not reflect the pattern of individual differences that are measured by means of the other index. However, from a reliability point of view, it seems appropriate to prefer the use of P/V index over the WS index in order to determine contractile state.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          CRD
          Cardiology
          10.1159/issn.0008-6312
          Cardiology
          S. Karger AG
          0008-6312
          1421-9751
          1992
          1992
          14 November 2008
          : 81
          : 1
          : 69-74
          Affiliations
          Life Sciences and Sport Medicine Department, The Zinman College at the Wingate Institute, Netanya, Israel
          Article
          175778 Cardiology 1992;81:69–74
          10.1159/000175778
          1477857
          © 1992 S. Karger AG, Basel

          Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

          Page count
          Pages: 6
          Categories
          Exercise and Cardiac Rehabilitation

          Comments

          Comment on this article