Clinical characteristics of left ventricular pressure decline during isovolumic relaxation in normal and diseased hearts

• Published in: The American heart journal Vol. 107; no. 2; pp. 332 - 338
• Main Authors: Katayama, Kazuhiro, Kumada, Toshiaki, Fujii, Takashi, Moritani, Koshiro, Miura, Toshiro, Toma, Yoichi, Kohno, Michihiro, Yoshino, Fumio, Ogawa, Hiroshi, Ozaki, Masaharu, Matsuzaki, Masunori, Matsuda, Yasuo, Kusukawa, Reizo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York, NY Mosby, Inc 01.02.1984; Elsevier
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Angina Pectoris - physiopathology; Biological and medical sciences; Blood Pressure; Cardiac Catheterization; Cardiomyopathies - physiopathology; Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic - physiopathology; Cardiovascular system; Coronary Vasospasm - physiopathology; Heart Diseases - physiopathology; Hemodynamics; Humans; Investigative techniques of hemodynamics; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects); Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Myocardial Contraction; Myocardial Infarction - physiopathology; Time Factors; Ventricular Function; Heart; Dp Dt(isovolumic relaxation time); Cardiomyopathy; Heart disease; Hemodynamics; Coronary heart disease; Left ventricle
• ISSN: 0002-8703; 1097-6744
• DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(84)90383-1

To compare two expressions of the time constant for ventricular relaxation, 39 patients with various heart diseases (six normal, six angina pectoris [AP], 13 myocardial infarction [MI], eight hypertrophic cardiomyopathy [HCM], and six congestive cardiomyopathy [CCM]) were studied. One time constant was obtained by the method of Weiss et al. 2 (T 1) and the other was the ratio of left ventricular pressure at peak (−) dP dt (Pm) to peak (−) dP dt (T 2). The deviation of T 2 from T 1 was expressed as 100× (T 2 − T 1) T 1 (δ%). In normal subjects, T 1 was nearly equal to T 2 (32 ± 3 and 32 ± 6 msec, respectively), resulting in a low value of δ (−1 ± 9). However, δ values in AP (20 ± 23, p < 0.05), MI (24 ± 26, p < 0.05), HCM (37 ± 21, p < 0.001), and CCM (46 ± 24, p < 0.001) were significantly higher than in normal subjects. Thus T 1, T 2, or δ separated the patient groups from the control subjects, and there were significant differences between T 1 and T 2 among the types of heart disease.