(Circulation. 1995;91:2010-2017.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
From the departments of Anesthesiology and Cardiology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, University Hospital Maastricht, The Netherlands (J.J.S., F.H.v.d.V., V.v.O., H.J.J.W.); the Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Leiden, The Netherlands (E.T.v.d.V.); the Departments of Cardiac Surgery and Cardiology, Lyon, France (F.D., O.J., G.F.); the Department of Cardiac Surgery, Ospedale Civile, Brescia, Italy (O.A., R.L.); and the Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands (J.R.C.J.).
Correspondence to J.J. Schreuder, MD, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Maastricht, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and Results We performed a beat-to-beat analysis of cardiac performance at rest in nine cardiomyoplasty patients 6 to 24 months after operation. Conductance and micromanometer catheters were placed in left ventricle and aorta and used for measurements over a 15-second period, during which the wrapped latissimus dorsi (LD) muscle was stimulated for 10 seconds in a 1:2 synchronization mode followed by a 5-second period without LD stimulation. The synchronization delay between start of the QRS complex and the LD contraction was changed from 4 up to 125 ms at the patient's clinical stimulation strength and at an increased supramaximal amplitude. Comparing the LD assisted period to the unassisted period, at the clinical settings no significant changes in stroke volume (SV) as measured by the conductance technique and the aortic Modelflow technique were observed. A significant (P<.05) rise in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) was observed directly after the assisted 10-second period. The peak ejection rate (PER) of left ventricular volume increased (P<.05), with a mean of 28±23% during the LD stimulated beats. At the patient's individual best setting, SV of the stimulated beats increased (P<.01) by a mean of 20±15%. Systolic aortic pressure increased (P<.01) by a mean of 7 mm Hg, peak negative dP/dt increased (P<.01), and PER increased, with a mean of 68±24% (P<.01). LVEDP was similar in stimulated and unstimulated beats and increased (P<.05) in the nonpaced 5-second period. The delay for the best setting ranged from 25 to 125 ms; the stimulus strength was 1.5 to 3 V higher than the clinical setting. At the patient's individual worst setting, SV remained unchanged and PER was higher, with a mean of 30±25% (P<.05). The worst setting was observed at the 1.5- to 3-V-higher stimulus strength; in six patients, it was at a short delay (4 to 25 ms) and in three patients, at the longest delay (100 to 125 ms).
Conclusions By the left ventricular conductance catheter and aortic Modelflow methods, improvement in cardiac function by dynamic cardiomyoplasty was demonstrated in this patient group. The synchronization interval, stimulus strength, and stimulus duration appeared to be critical for obtaining optimal improvement.
Key Words: pressure stroke volume ventricles diastole electrophysiology
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To elucidate whether dynamic cardiomyoplasty affects cardiac function, analysis of individual cardiac contractions with and without skeletal muscle stimulation should be performed. Some studies, which measured ventricular ejection fraction by echocardiography or by radionuclide angiography, demonstrated an increase in the ejection fraction due to skeletal muscle cardiac assistance3 4 ; another study reported no change.2
The absence of changes in cardiac output or ejection fraction in patients who clinically improved may have several causes.
First, the resolution of the techniques used may have been too small in relation to the magnitude of the hemodynamic changes induced by the wrapped latissimus dorsi (LD) muscle contraction.5
Second, inappropriate synchronization and stimulation settings of the cardiomyostimulator in relation to cardiac contraction may negatively affect cardiac function. For instance, a decrease in stroke volume (SV) was demonstrated in an animal study when LD muscle was stimulated during ventricular depolarization.6 In another animal study,7 increases in SV were demonstrated at an optimal individual synchronization delay range. A follow-up study of 78 cardiomyoplasty patients reported that fixed synchronization delays equally divided in a range from 4 to 125 ms were applied.8
Third, cardiovascular compensatory mechanisms may counteract possible positive effects of LD muscle stimulation when an appropriate output state in the patient has been attained. When the heart as a pump is not the limiting factor in providing adequate organ perfusion, a condition that occurs in most of these patients at rest, an increase in contractility will not result in an increase in cardiac output.
Last, a decrease or prevention of acute or chronic ventricular dilatation may be a major beneficial mechanism associated with dynamic cardiomyoplasty.9
To evaluate these possible mechanisms, we studied the acute, direct hemodynamic effects of skeletal muscle stimulation, on a beat-to-beat basis, in nine patients at rest several months after operation. The conductance catheter technique introduced by Baan et al10 was used to measure left ventricular volume instantaneously. The aortic Modelflow method according to Wesseling et al11 was used to measure left ventricular SV.
The hemodynamic effects of cardiomyoplasty were studied during periods of 10-second LD muscle stimulation performed at varied synchronization delays after ventricular activation followed by periods of 5 seconds without LD muscle stimulation. The measurements were carried out at two different LD stimulation strengths: at the previously chosen clinical amplitude and at an increased supramaximal amplitude to obtain complete muscle fiber recruitment.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Cardiomyoplasty Procedure
Of the nine patients studied, six
had been operated on in Lyon
(France) and three in Brescia (Italy). The surgical technique has been
described by Chachques et al.12 Briefly, the left LD
muscle was mobilized, with the neurovascular pedicle kept intact. After
two intramuscular stimulation electrodes (Medtronic SP 5528) were
attached, the muscle was introduced into the thoracic cavity and
wrapped clockwise around both ventricles. The stimulation electrodes
and a sensing electrode attached to the right ventricular wall were
connected to a cardiomyostimulator (SP1005, Medtronic). Additional
surgery involved aneurysmectomy in two patients and coronary artery
bypass graft surgery in three (Table 1
).
Postoperative Evaluation
This study, which had been approved
by the medical ethics
committees of the respective hospitals, was performed 6 to 24 months
after the cardiomyoplasty procedure. Informed patient consent was
obtained for insertion of the catheters and for testing at different
settings of the cardiomyostimulator.
Patients were sedated and heparinized before catheterization. A Swan-Ganz thermodilution catheter was placed in the pulmonary artery. A double micromanometer transducer catheter (7.5F, Sentron) was inserted via the femoral artery into the left ventricle for the measurement of aortic and left ventricular pressures.
A 12-electrode (dual-field) conductance catheter (7.5F, Webster Labs or 7F, Sentron) was inserted via the other femoral artery into the left ventricle. The correct positioning of the conductance catheter was verified by radiography and by inspection of the segmental conductance signals. In two patients (patients 1 and 2), a 2F micromanometer catheter (Millar Instruments, Inc) was inserted inside the ventricular lumen of the conductance catheter, while aortic pressure was measured by a separate micromanometer catheter (5F, Sentron).
The conductance catheter method uses a Leycom Sigma-5DF signal conditionerprocessor (CardioDynamics) to estimate left ventricular volume.10 13 The method is based on measuring the time-varying electrical conductances of five segments of blood in the left ventricle. The five segmental conductances are measured from six adjacent electrodes, and total left ventricular volume is calculated from the sum of the five segmental conductances. The dual-field modification, which has been shown to improve the accuracy of the method, was used in all patients.14 The conductance catheter not only continuously measures the amount of blood in the left ventricle but also the conductance of the myocardium and other surrounding tissues. This parallel conductance offset term was estimated by injection of 5 mL of hypertonic saline (8%) into the pulmonary artery10 without LD stimulation. In three patients, parallel conductance was also estimated during LD stimulation at the highest voltage. Effects of LD stimulation on regional contraction patterns could be studied from the five segmental conductance catheter segments.15
We did not attempt to estimate ventricular function by end-systolic elastance or preload recruitable stroke work in these patients, because this requires a change in loading conditions.16 This was not applied in this group of patients because preoperative conductance catheter and Modelflow measurements were not performed. However, the end-systolic pressure-volume (P-V) points as markers of ventricular performance can be derived from the P-V relations. Moreover, peak ejection rate (PER, negative dV/dtmax) was calculated from the ventricular volume signal as a measure of ventricular pump function analogous to the velocity of circumferential shortening.17
The aortic Modelflow method computes relative SV from aortic pressure using a nonlinear, time-varying three-element Windkessel model.11 The model elements include aortic characteristic impedance, arterial compliance, and systemic vascular resistance. The aortic characteristic impedance and arterial compliance depend on the aortic cross-sectional area, which can be estimated from mean arterial pressure, age, and sex.18 To adapt this estimate of cross-sectional area to that of the individual patient, Modelflow was calibrated by cardiac output measured by thermodilution.
To obtain reliable estimates of cardiac output by thermodilution, a computer-controlled injection system was used.19 20 Cardiac output was determined by use of a cardiac output computer (COM-2, Baxter) and injections of 10 mL ice-cold glucose 5%.
Data Acquisition and Analysis
ECG (extremity leads), aortic
pressure, left ventricular
pressure, and left ventricular volume signals were digitized at a
sampling rate of 200 Hz on a 80386 personal computer. The dedicated
data-acquisition and -analysis software package
CONDUCT-PC (CardioDynamics) was applied for conductance
catheterrelated data analysis. The continuous cardiac output
software package Modelflow (TNO Biomedical Instrumentation, Amsterdam,
the Netherlands) was applied for calculation of left ventriuclar stroke
volume.
Experimental Protocol
After insertion of the catheters,
baseline measurements were
performed with the LD stimulator off. Blood resistance and parallel
conductance were measured before baseline measurements. Episodes of 15
seconds' duration were recorded while the patients performed
expiratory breath-holding to prevent respiration-related changes in
venous return. The LD stimulator was synchronized in a 1:2 ratio during
the first 10 seconds leading to one assisted beat for every two
ventricular contractions, immediately followed by a nonpaced episode of
5 seconds after blocking of the LD stimulator.
The LD stimulation protocol started with the patient's clinical setting, at a burst rate of 30 Hz, a burst duration of 185 ms, an individual stimulus strength between 3 and 8 V, and an individual delay synchronized to the QRS complex.
Stimulation was performed at delays of 4, 25, 50, 75, 100, and 125 ms. This series was then repeated at a 1.5- to 3-V-higher supramaximal stimulus strength. Whenever an obvious best setting was observed during the measurements, this stimulator setting was repeated at a stimulus duration of 240 ms. Comparisons were made between LD assisted beats and nonassisted beats of the 10-second period and beats of the nonpaced 5-second period.
Statistical analysis was done with Student's test for paired variates; comparison between three data groups was also performed with randomized block ANOVA. Values are presented as mean±SD; significance was assumed at P<.05.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The study group originally consisted of 13 patients. In 2 patients, arrhythmic cardiac contractions prevented a proper analysis of the P-V loops; another patient had Valsalva maneuvers during the 15-second sample periods; and in 1 patient, the conductance catheter signals were not suitable for proper analysis. In all these cases, however, SV estimations by Modelflow revealed changes due to LD stimulation similar to those in the other 9 patients.
The mean duration of the breath-holding episodes was 15±2 seconds. A
baseline cardiac index ranging from 1.4 up to 3.0 L/min was observed
without cardiomyostimulation (Table 1
).
Fig 1
shows representative recordings of the
conductance catheter of patient 7. The stimulated beats revealed a
decrease in end-systolic volume and an increase in SV compared with
unstimulated beats, and concomitant higher systolic aortic pressures.
Fig 2
shows left ventricular segmental volume changes of
patient 1, and the contribution of specific segments to the total
increase in SV can be studied.
|
|
In three patients, the parallel conductance was similar during LD stimulation (234±28 mL) and without LD stimulation (230±27 mL).
Table 2
presents the results of nine patients at
their clinically used LD stimulator setting. Mean SV determined by the
Modelflow method (SVmf) and the conductance catheter method
(SVcon) of the stimulated beats both increased
(P<.05), with a mean of 3% compared with the unstimulated
beats in between. Mean SV of the nonpaced 5-second period was not
significantly changed compared with the mean SV of the earlier
10-second 1:2 stimulated period. Systolic aortic pressure,
dP/dtmax, and end-systolic volume remained
unchanged during the LD stimulation period. Left ventricular
end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) was similar in the
stimulated and unstimulated beats and increased (P<.05) in
the subsequent nonpaced 5-second period. End-systolic volume,
dP/dtmax, remained unchanged during LD stimulation. Peak
negative dP/dt was higher (P<.05) in the stimulated beats
compared with the alternating unstimulated beats (during the 10-second
LD stimulated period) and unchanged compared with the nonpaced period.
PER was higher, with a mean of 28±23% (P<.05) during the
stimulated beats compared with the unstimulated beats of both periods.
The clinically used delays were at 25 and 50 ms, and stimulus strengths
ranged from 4 to 9 V.
|
Table 3
presents the results of the nine patients at
the individual best setting. The best and the worst settings were
defined as largest and smallest increases in SV due to LD stimulation
as measured by both the Modelflow and conductance methods at the higher
applied stimulus strength.
|
At the patient's best setting, SVmf and SVcon increased significantly (P<.01) during LD stimulation compared with the alternating unstimulated beats. The SV poststimulated period was significantly lower (P<.01), with a mean of 8% compared with the preceding 1:2 stimulated 10-second period. Systolic aortic pressure was higher (P<.01) during LD stimulation, with a mean of 7 mm Hg, whereas diastolic pressure was lower (P<.01), with a mean of 2 mm Hg. Left ventricular end-systolic volume decreased in eight patients during LD stimulation, while end-diastolic volume was unchanged in four patients, slightly increased in four patients (patients 3, 6, 7, and 8), and decreased in one patient (patient 1). LVEDP was similar in stimulated and unstimulated beats and increased significantly (P<.05) in the nonpaced 5-second period. Maximal dP/dt was unchanged between stimulated and unstimulated beats. Peak negative dP/dt was higher (P<.01 and P<.05) during the stimulated beats compared with the unstimulated beats during the stimulated and nonpaced periods, respectively. The PER of the stimulated beats was significantly higher (P<.01), with a mean of 68±24% compared with the unstimulated beats of the stimulated and nonpaced periods.
In all patients, the optimal stimulus strength was at the 1.5- to
3-V-higher voltage. In one patient (patient 2) the best setting
occurred at the longer applied stimulus duration of 240 ms. Fig
3
presents P-V loops of all nine patients at their
best settings. In eight patients, no signs of abnormal left ventricular
relaxation during LD stimulation could be observed. Also, middiastolic
pressure was not significantly changed during the LD stimulated beats.
In two patients (patients 2 and 8), an abnormal isovolemic contraction
phase, suggesting mitral valve regurgitation, can be observed. The P-V
loops during LD stimulation clearly demonstrated a leftward shift of
the end-systolic P-V points in each patient, increased SVs and systolic
LV pressure, and therefore stroke work at similar
end-diastolic volumes.
|
At the patient's worst setting (Table 4
),
SVmf and SVcon were not significantly changed
during LD stimulation. In four patients, SVmf and
SVcon decreased during LD stimulation. End-systolic volume,
dP/dtmax, and peak negative dP/dt remained
unchanged during LD stimulation. Systolic aortic pressure was slightly
higher (P<.05) during LD stimulation. LVEDP during the
nonpaced period was higher (P<.05) compared with the
stimulated and unstimulated beats of the stimulated period. The PER of
the stimulated beats was higher (P<.05), with a mean of
30±25% compared with the unstimulated beats of both periods. In six
patients, the worst setting was at a short delay and in three patients,
at a relatively long delay.
|
The regression equation of the percentage change in the SVcon and SVmf methods was SVcon=1.34±0.96 SVmf, r=.96, n=27.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Techniques
The feasibility of the conductance catheter
technique has
been demonstrated in patients during cardiac surgery.16 An
excellent correlation between SVcon and SVmf
changes was observed in the present study. The resolution of these
two objective and independent methods surpasses the changes in SV
observed at the best settings. According to Applegate et
al,21 the conductance catheter accurately measures volume
with high time resolution over single cardiac cycles, provided that the
preload changes are within a physiological range. LD stimulation might
have effects on the parallel conductance of left ventricular volume.
However, in three patients, similar parallel conductance values with
and without LD stimulation were observed. Moreover, the combined
results of SVcon and SVmf reveal that effects
of a change in parallel conductance on SV, if present, are
small.
The three-element Windkessel model provides a reasonable
representation of afterload to estimate SV when real impedance
spectra are incorporated in the model.22 In a human study,
this was also demonstrated by Modelflow,11 a nonlinear
three-element Windkessel model with incorporated static elastic
properties of the human aorta.18 A direct effect of LD
muscle stimulation on arterial impedance is not likely because the LD
muscle is wrapped around the heart. An "indirect" change of
aortic geometry could result from a heart lifting effect of LD
stimulation, which might possibly lead to a change in aortic input
impedance. Such an effect should be present especially during
stimulation at the early delays and should give different results for
conductance and Modelflow SVs. However, such deviations were not
present during the worst setting (Table 4
).
Cardiac Output
SV was measured during relatively short
periods of about 15
seconds when assisted and unassisted cardiac contractions were
compared. These short periods were selected to prevent effects of
hemodynamic compensatory reflexes, which may appear 10 to 15 seconds
after a significant hemodynamic change. At the clinically used setting,
no significant change in SV was observed in comparing the assisted
period to the unassisted period.
A mean increase in SV of 20% of the assisted beats compared with the nonassisted beats in between was observed at the patient's individual best stimulator setting. Comparing SV of all the beats of the assisted period with the nonpaced period revealed a mean increase <10% (8%). Thus, in some patients, the increase in SV was partly at the cost of the unstimulated beats in between. Extrapolation of the increase in SV at this best setting to a longer period may result in an effective improvement of cardiac output of 8%, provided that compensatory reflexes do not occur.
Synchronization Delay
The delay between onset of the QRS
complex and contraction of the
wrapped LD muscle appeared to be critical, with SV even decreasing at
the individual worst delay settings (Table 4
). The optimal
delay ranged
from 25 to 125 ms in the nine patients studied, while the worst delay
setting was early (4 and 25 ms) in six patients and relatively late
(100 and 125 ms) in the other three. The optimal delay may be related
to several factors. First, LD muscle contraction should be synchronized
to the ejection phase to induce a larger SV. Second, because
intraventricular conduction is disturbed in many patients with chronic
heart failure, the proper onset of skeletal muscle contraction will
also be dependent on the individual duration of intraventricular
conduction. In the present study, three of the nine patients had
bundle branch block and one had a DDD pacemaker. Third, the QRS
synchronization delay should be triggered by the steep phase of the QR
interval. In one patient (patient 6), the synchronization delay was
triggered by the RS part of the ECG, revealing that a given delay is
not always referring to a fixed reference point. In this case, the
75-ms delay was comparable to a delay of 135 ms in the other
patients.
Last, the presence of aneurysms or dyskinetic areas can evoke
paradoxical movements of the ventricular wall that may require
different timing of LD muscle contraction. Segmental volume
analysis of patient 1, with an unresected apical aneurysm, showed a
contribution of the apical segments to the volume decrease during LD
stimulation (Fig 2
), whereas the apex showed a paradoxical
volume
change during the ejection phase without stimulation. In this case, the
paradoxical apical movement is presumably forced into phase with the
other segments during LD stimulation.
Left Ventricular Pressure
In general, it can be expected that
the diastolic phase of the
left ventricle will be hampered by the wrapped LD muscle, even without
LD muscle contraction.23 In the present study, no
significant difference was observed between the LVEDP of the stimulated
and alternating unstimulated beat at any setting used. At all settings,
however, the LVEDP was significantly higher during the nonpaced
5-second period. A possible intrathoracic pressure-increasing effect
due to a Valsalva-like maneuver at the end of the 15-second breath-hold
period must be considered, but this should decrease venous return
immediately.
At the best setting, peak negative dP/dt was even significantly higher, and diastolic pressure did not change during the LD stimulated beats, indicating the absence of a deleterious effect on diastolic function.
Contractile State
The increase in systolic aortic pressure is
in agreement with the
increased SV and higher PER during LD stimulation. In contrast, left
ventricular dP/dtmax was not significantly changed
in the best, worst, and clinical settings. An increase in
dP/dtmax is not indicative of an increased SV during
LD stimulation because, in most circumstances, the maximum pressure
rise develops before the opening of the aortic valve.24 On
the other hand, peak ejection rate during the systolic ejection phase
increased significantly during LD stimulation in the clinical, worst,
and best settings. As mentioned by Lee et al,25 the peak
velocity of circumferential shortening is decreased in dilated
cardiomyopathy as a consequence of intrinsic myocardial disease and
increased afterload.
The increase in peak ejection rate determined as
-dV/dtmax during LD muscle stimulation is also
clearly demonstrated in Fig 2
, in which the net systolic
ejection time
is shorter and SV is larger during the stimulated heartbeats.
During LD stimulation at the best setting, the leftward shift of the end-systolic pressure-volume points, the increase in PER with a mean of 68%, the increase of peak negative dP/dt, the decreased LVEDP compared with the clinical setting, and the increased SV all indicate a higher contractile state of the combined left ventricular and wrapped LD muscle. Moreover, all these changes occurred at a similar preload in stimulated and unstimulated beats, whereas the afterload of the stimulated beats as derived from the diastolic aortic pressure was higher.
Analysis of the end-systolic pressure-volume relation using a preload reduction maneuver26 27 has been reported in animal studies. However, this technique will probably reveal increases in end-systolic elastance and shifts to a lower end-systolic volume only when the applied stimulator settings are tuned to the patient's individual best settings.
Synchronization Model
Measurements of LD muscle shortening
from x-ray films demonstrated
that the contraction-relaxation cycle of a stimulated LD muscle may
last up to 600 ms in a cardiomyoplasty patient.28 29
Ideally, the contraction phase of the LD muscle should coincide with
the ejection phase, and the relaxation phase should not interfere with
the subsequent diastolic filling phase.
The increase in PER with a mean of 30% at the worst setting without an obvious increase in SV suggests that effective LD muscle shortening lasted too short a time. In six patients, the worst setting was observed at a short delay (4 and 25 ms), suggestive of an ineffective LD muscle contraction starting before and finishing too early during the systolic ejection phase. This may impair systolic ejection because of a tetanic or relaxing LD muscle causing an increase in (pseudo) afterload at the end of the ejection phase. In the other three patients, the worst settings were observed at the late delays, suggesting ineffective LD muscle contraction occurring too late during the ejection phase.
In Fig 4
, changes in delay combined
with the contraction
cycle of the LD muscle and left ventricular pressure and volume are
presented schematically, assuming an interval of 50 ms between
start of the stimulus and LD contraction.
|
Conclusions
This study shows that in patients 6 to 24 months
after
cardiomyoplasty surgery, significant hemodynamic effects were
present during LD muscle stimulation when the patients were at
rest. This was demonstrated on a beat-to-beat basis by two
operator-independent techniques with a high time resolution: the
conductance catheter technique and the aortic Modelflow method.
Beat-to-beat analyses allow the hemodynamic effects to be observed
before cardiovascular compensatory reflexes become operative. The
cardiomyostimulator settings appeared to be critical in obtaining an
increase or decrease in SV during stimulation. At the optimal
stimulator setting, the increased contractile state during LD
stimulation of the left ventricleLD muscle combination is
demonstrated by the increased peak ejection rate, leftward shift of the
end-systolic P-V points, increased negative
dP/dtmax, increased SV, and lower
end-diastolic left ventricular pressure at similar preload
and afterload conditions compared with the unstimulated beats. On the
basis of the 68% increase in PER at the best setting, one may expect a
substantially larger SV, provided that an ideally timed (delay,
stimulus duration) skeletal muscle contraction at a given amplitude can
be obtained.
At the clinically used settings, we could not demonstrate an improvement in SV, but LVEDP increased immediately after the 10-second stimulation period. Clinical improvement (NYHA class) therefore may have been caused by active prevention of cardiac dilatation.
In the present study, patients were evaluated at rest, whereas hemodynamic assist during exercise is of clinical importance. Therefore, the relevance of the findings described should be confirmed while patients perform exercise.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Received July 7, 1994; revision received October 10, 1994; accepted October 31, 1994.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Delahaye F, Jegaden O, Montagna P, Desseigne P, Blanc P, Vedrinne C, Tonboul P, Saint-Pierre A, Perinetti M, Rossi R, Itti R, Mikaeloff P. Latissimus dorsi l in severe congestive heart failure: the Lyon experience. J Card Surg. 1991;65:106-112.
3. Moreira LEF, Stolf NAG, Bocchi EA, Pereira-Baretto AC, Meneghetti JC, Giorgi MCP, Moraes AV, Leite JJ, da Luz PL, Jatene AD. Latissimus dorsi cardiomyoplasty in the treatment of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. Circulation. 1990;82(suppl IV): IV-257-IV-263.
4. Magovern JA, Magovern GJ (sr), Maker TD, Benckart DH, Park SB, Christlieb IY, Magovern GJ. Operation for congestive heart failure: transplantation, coronary artery bypass, and cardiomyoplasty. Ann Thorac Surg. 1993;56:418-425. [Abstract]
5. Lee KF, Dignan RJ, Parmar YM, Dyke CM, Benton G, Yeh T, Abd.-Elfattah AS, Wecksler AS. Effects of dynamic cardiomyoplasty on left ventricular performance and myocardial mechanics in dilated cardiomyopathy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1991; 162:124-131.
6. Molteni L, Almada H, Ferreira R, Ortega D. Assessment of the optimal time interval between QRS and single pulse stimulation in dynamic cardiomyoplasty. In: Chiu RCI, Bourgeois IM, eds. Transformed Muscle for Cardiac Assist and Repair. Mount Kisco, NY: Futura Publishing Co Inc; 1990:189-196.
7. Geddes LA, Janas W, Bourland JD, Cook J, Hinds M. The importance of timing muscle contraction in dynamic cardiomyoplasty. PACE Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1993;16:2255-2265. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Grandjean PA, Autin L, Chan S, Terpstra B, Bourgeois IM. Dynamic cardiomyoplasty: clinical follow-up results. J Card Surg. 1991;6S:80-88.
9. Chachques JC, Acar C, Tapia M, Guibourt P, Fiemeyer A, Bensasson D, Berrebi A, Grare P, Bechara M, Baron JF, Carpentier M. Résultats à moyen terme de la cardiomyoplasty. Arch Mal Coeur. 1994;87:49-56.
10.
Baan J, van der Velde ET, De Bruin HG, Smeenk GJ, Koops J, Van
Dijk AD, Temmerman D, Senden PJ, Buis B. Continuous measurement of left
ventricular volume in animals and humans by conductance catheter.
Circulation. 1984;70:812-823.
11.
Wesseling KH, Janssen JRC, Settels JJ, Schreuder JJ.
Computation of aortic flow from pressure in humans using a nonlinear,
three-element model. J Appl Physiol. 1993;74:2566-2573.
12. Chachques JC, Grandjean PA, Carpentier A. Latissimus dorsi dynamic cardiomyoplasty. Ann Thorac Surg. 1989;47:600-604. [Abstract]
13. Burkhoff D, van der Velde ET, Kass D, Baan J, Maughan WL, Sagawa K. Accuracy of volume measurement by conductance catheter in isolated, ejecting canine hearts. Circulation. 1985;72: 440-447.
14. Steendijk P, van der Velde ET, Baan J. Left ventricular stroke volume by single and dual excitation of the conductance catheter in dogs. Am J Physiol. 1993;264(Heart Circ Physiol 33):H2198-H2207.
15. Van der Velde ET, van Dijk AD, Steendijk P, Diethelm L, Chagas A, Lipton MJ, Glantz SA, Baan J. Left ventricular segmental volume by conductance catheter and cine-CT. Eur Heart J. 1992;13(suppl E):15-21.
16. Schreuder JJ, Biervliet JD, van der Velde ET, Ten Have K, van Dijk AD, Meyne NG, Baan J. Systolic and diastolic pressure volume relationships during cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 1991;5:539-545. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
17. Van der Linden LP, van der Velde ET, Bruschke AVG, Baan J. Comparison between force-velocity and end-systolic pressure-volume characterization of intrinsic LV function. Am J Physiol. 1990;259(Heart Circ Physiol 28):H1419-H1426.
18. Langewouters GJ, Wesseling KH, Goedhard WJA. The static elastic properties of 45 human thoracic and abdominal aortas in vitro and the parameters of a new model. J Biomech. 1984;17: 425-435.
19. Jansen JRC, Schreuder JJ, Settels JJ, Kloek JJ, Versprille A. An adequate strategy for the thermodilution technique in patients during mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med. 1990;16:422-425. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
20. Jansen JRC, Wesseling KH, Settels JJ, Schreuder JJ. Continuous cardiac output monitoring by pulse contour during cardiac surgery. Eur Heart J. 1990;11SI:26-32.
21.
Applegate RJ, Cheng CP, Little WC. Simultaneous conductance
catheter and dimension assessment of left ventricle volume in the
intact animal. Circulation. 1990;81:638-648.
22. Burkhoff D, Alexander J, Schipke J. Assessment of Windkessel as a model of aortic input impedance. Am J Physiol. 1988;255(Heart Circ Physiol 24):H742-H753.
23. Cheng W, Avila RA, Davis BS, Robertazzi R, Nathan I, Marini CP, Cunningham JN, Jacobowitz IJ. Dynamic cardiomyoplasty: left ventricular diastolic compliance at different skeletal muscle tensions. Am Surg. 1994;60:128-131. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
24.
Quinones MA, Gaasch WH, Alexander JK. Influence of acute
changes in preload, afterload, contractile state and heart rate on
ejection and isovolumic indices of myocardial contractility in man.
Circulation. 1976;53:293-302.
25. Lee KF, Dyke CM, Wechsler AS. Theoretical considerations in the use of dynamic cardiomyoplasty to treat dilated cardiomyopathy. J Card Surg. 1991;6S:119-123.
26. Ruggiero R, Thomas GA, Niinami H, Lu H, Hooper TL, Hammond RL, Fietsam R, Mocek FW, Nakajima H, Nakajima HO, Stephenson LW. Double cardiomyoplasty: acute versus chronic results. Ann Thorac Surg. 1993;56:31-37. [Abstract]
27. Cho PW, Levin HR, Curtis WE, Tsitslik JE, Dinatale M, Kass DA, Gardner TJ, Kunel RW, Acher MA. Pressure-volume analysis of changes in cardiac function in chronic cardiomyoplasty. Ann Thorac Surg. 1993;56:38-45. [Abstract]
28. Van der Veen FH, Lucas CMHB, Lorusso R, van der Nagel T, Penn OCKM, Wellens HJJ. A new method to select stimulus strength after cardiomyoplasty. J Card Surg. 1991;6S:259-264.
29. Lucas CMBH, van der Veen FH, Cheriex EC, van Ommen V, Penn OCKM, Wellens HJJ. The importance of muscle relaxation in dynamic cardiomyoplasty. PACE Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1992;15:1430-1436.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Salmons Cardiac assistance from skeletal muscle: a reappraisal Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., February 1, 2009; 35(2): 204 - 213. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Chachques, O. J. Jegaden, V. Bors, T. Mesana, C. Latremouille, P. A. Grandjean, J. N. Fabiani, and A. Carpentier Heart transplantation following cardiomyoplasty: a biological bridge Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., April 1, 2008; 33(4): 685 - 690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. A. Dawson, R. Shave, G. Whyte, D. Ball, C. Selmer, O. Jans, N. H. Secher, and K. P. George Preload maintenance and the left ventricular response to prolonged exercise in men Exp Physiol, March 1, 2007; 92(2): 383 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Schreuder, F. Maisano, A. Donelli, J. R.C. Jansen, P. Hanlon, J. Bovelander, and O. Alfieri Beat-to-Beat Effects of Intraaortic Balloon Pump Timing on Left Ventricular Performance in Patients With Low Ejection Fraction Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2005; 79(3): 872 - 880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Bolotin, F. H. van der Veen, T. Wolf, R. Shofti, R. Lorusso, S. A. Ben-Haim, and G. Uretzky Use of Novel Nonfluoroscopic Three-Dimensional Electroanatomic Mapping System To Monitor and Analyze Heart Surgery in Animal Models Chest, May 1, 2004; 125(5): 1830 - 1836. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Benicio, L. F. P. Moreira, F. Bacal, N. A. G. Stolf, and S. A. Oliveira Reevaluation of long-term outcomes of dynamic cardiomyoplasty Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2003; 76(3): 821 - 827. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. G. Kaulbach, R. Lorusso, G. Bolotin, J. J. Schreuder, and F. H. van der Veen Effects of chronic cardiomyoplasty on ventricular remodeling in a goat model of chronic cardiac dilatation: part 2 Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 2002; 74(2): 514 - 521. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. M. Mueller, H. T. Tevaearai, O. Tucker, Y. Boone, and L. K. von Segesser Reshaping the remodelled left ventricle: a new concept Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., October 1, 2001; 20(4): 786 - 791. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. V. Letsou, J. F. Hogan, C. C. Miller III, J. A. Elefteriades, D. Francischelli, J. C. Baldwin, and H. J. Safi Physiologic characteristics of canine skeletal muscle: implications for timing skeletal muscle cardiac assist devices Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2001; 72(4): 1336 - 1342. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Konertz, S. Dushe, H. Hotz, C. Spies, C. Enzweiler, and F.-X. Kleber Cardiac Support Device: Novel Surgical Option for Heart Failure Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, September 1, 2001; 9(3): 167 - 170. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. A. Bocchi Cardiomyoplasty for treatment of heart failure Eur J Heart Fail, August 1, 2001; 3(4): 403 - 406. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Schreuder, P. Steendijk, F. H. van der Veen, O. Alfieri, T. van der Nagel, R. Lorusso, J.-M. van Dantzig, K. B. Prenger, J. Baan, H. J. J. Wellens, et al. Acute and short-term effects of partial left ventriculectomy in dilated cardiomyopathy: Assessment by pressure-volume loops J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 1, 2000; 36(7): 2104 - 2114. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Carraro, M. Barbiero, G. Docali, A. Cotogni, G. Rigatelli, D. Casarotto, and C. Muneretto Demand dynamic cardiomyoplasty: mechanograms prove incomplete transformation of the rested latissimus dorsi Ann. Thorac. Surg., July 1, 2000; 70(1): 67 - 73. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. M. Braile, M. F. Godoy, G. H. Thevenard, R. S. Thevenard, M. C.V.B. Braile, J. C.F. Leal, and M. Schaldach Dynamic cardiomyoplasty: long-term clinical results in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2000; 69(5): 1445 - 1447. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Acker Dynamic cardiomyoplasty: at the crossroads Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 1999; 68(2): 750 - 755. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. J. W. van Kraaij, R. W. M. M. Jansen, L. H. R. Bouwels, and W. H. L. Hoefnagels Furosemide Withdrawal Improves Postprandial Hypotension in Elderly Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Left Ventricular Systolic Function Arch Intern Med, July 26, 1999; 159(14): 1599 - 1605. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Arpesella, U. Carraro, P. M. Mikus, F. Dozza, P. Lombardi, G. Marinelli, S. Zampieri, A. H. El Messlemani, K. Rossini, and A. Pierangeli Activity-rest stimulation of latissimus dorsi for cardiomyoplasty: 1-year results in sheep Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 1998; 66(6): 1983 - 1990. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Vos, S. H. M. de Groot, S. C. Verduyn, J. van der Zande, H. D. M. Leunissen, J. P. M. Cleutjens, M. van Bilsen, M. J. A. P. Daemen, J. J. Schreuder, M. A. Allessie, et al. Enhanced Susceptibility for Acquired Torsade de Pointes Arrhythmias in the Dog With Chronic, Complete AV Block Is Related to Cardiac Hypertrophy and Electrical Remodeling Circulation, September 15, 1998; 98(11): 1125 - 1135. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Kawaguchi, Y. Huang, T. Yuasa, C. J. Horam, R. J. Carrington, Z. Biao, P. W. Brady, M. Murase, and S. N. Hunyor Improved efficiency of energy transfer to external work in chronic cardiomyoplasty based on the pressure-volume relationship J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 1998; 115(6): 1358 - 1366. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. D. Mott, J. H. Oh, Y. Misawa, J. Helou, V. Badhwar, D. Francischelli, and R. C.-J. Chiu Mechanisms of Cardiomyoplasty: Comparative Effects of Adynamic Versus Dynamic Cardiomyoplasty Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 1998; 65(4): 1039 - 1044. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Lorusso, O. Alfieri, U. Carraro, J. J. Schreuder, and H. J.J. Wellens Preserved skeletal muscle structure with modified electrical stimulation protocol in a cardiomyoplasty patient: a clinico-pathological report Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., February 1, 1998; 13(2): 213 - 215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. W. Guldner, P. Klapproth, J. M. Hasenkam, T. Fischer, R. Keller, R. Noel, B. Keding, E. Joubert-Hubner, H. Kuppe, and H.-H. Sievers NEW METHOD FOR MONITORING THE FUNCTIONAL STATE OF A DYNAMIC CARDIOMYOPLASTY J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 1997; 114(6): 1097 - 1106. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
H. J. Patel, D. J. Polidori, J. J. Pilla, T. Plappert, D. Kass, M. S. J. Sutton, E. B. Lankford, and M. A. Acker Stabilization of Chronic Remodeling by Asynchronous Cardiomyoplasty in Dilated Cardiomyopathy : Effects of a Conditioned Muscle Wrap Circulation, November 18, 1997; 96(10): 3665 - 3671. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
J.J. Schreuder, F.H. van der Veen, E.T. van der Velde, F. Delahaye, O. Alfieri, O. Jegaden, R. Lorusso, J.R.C. Jansen, S.A.A.P. Hoeksel, G. Finet, et al. Left Ventricular Pressure-Volume Relationships Before and After Cardiomyoplasty in Patients With Heart Failure Circulation, November 4, 1997; 96(9): 2978 - 2986. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
L. Aklog, F. Y. Chen, BrianJ. deGuzman, MichaelP. Murphy, WendelJ. Smith, RitaG. Laurence, RobertF. Appleyard, and L. H. Cohn Right Latissimus Dorsi Cardiomyoplasty Improves Left Ventricular Energetics Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 1997; 64(3): 670 - 677. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
O. Kawaguchi, Y. Goto, Y. Ohgoshi, H. Yaku, M. Murase, and H. Suga DYNAMIC CARDIAC COMPRESSION IMPROVES CONTRACTILE EFFICIENCY OF THE HEART J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 1997; 113(5): 923 - 931. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
E. R. Soltero, D. H. Glaeser, L. H. Michael, C. J. Hartley, N. R. Earle, Z. Li, and G. M. Lawrie Hemodynamic Effects of Different Pacing Ratios in Chronic Dynamic Double Cardiomyoplasty Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 1996; 62(5): 1380 - 1387. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Chachques, M. Tapia, M. Radermercker, M. Pellerin, J. F. Fuzellier, M. J. Tolan, X. Renard, V. Mitz, and A. F. Carpentier Association of Latissimus Dorsi Muscle Expansion With Electrostimulation Before Cardiomyoplasty Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 1996; 61(1): 138 - 142. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
R. Lorusso, O. Alfieri, F. van der Veen, and J. Schreuder Optimizing Cardiomyoplasty Results: Importance of Muscle Contraction Timing Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 1995; 60(6): 1862 - 1863. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
R. Lange, F.-U. Sack, B. Voss, R. De Simone, M. Thielmann, A. Nair, J. Brachmann, R. Haussmann, F. Fleischer, and S. Hagl Treatment of Dilated Cardiomyopathy With Dynamic Cardiomyoplasty: The Heidelberg Experience Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 1995; 60(5): 1219 - 1225. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Chachques and A. F. Carpentier The scientific development of dynamic cardiomyoplasty J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., October 1, 1995; 110(4): 1154 - 1155. [Full Text] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1995 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |