Özdemir, KurtuluşAltunkeser, Bülent BehlülDanış, GidizarÖzdemir, AyşeUluca, YavuzTokaç, MehmetTelli, Hasan H.2020-03-262020-03-262001Özdemir, K., Altunkeser, B. B., Danış, G., Özdemir, A., Uluca, Y., Tokaç, M., Telli, H. H., (2001). Effect of the Isolated Left Bundle Branch Block on Systolic and Diastolic Functions of Left Ventricle. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography, 14(11), 1075-1079. Doi:10.1067/mje.2001.1156550894-7317https://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mje.2001.115655https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/1753010th Annual Scientific Sessions of the American-Society-of-Echocardiography -- JUN 13-16, 1999 -- WASHINGTON, D.C.Background: We planned this study to evaluate the effects of left bundle branch block (LBBB) on systolic and diastolic functions of left ventricle (LV) that have not previously been investigated in detail. Material and Methods. Forty-five cases diagnosed as isolated LBBB according to the standard electrocardiographic criteria (group I, mean age: 60 +/- 12 years) were taken as the case group and 65 cases with normal conduction system (group II, mean age 58 +/- 14 years) were taken as the control group. Echocardiography was performed to all patients and coronary angiography was performed to 21 patients in group I and 35 patients in group II. In addition to standard systolic and diastolic function parameters, isovolumetric relaxation time (IRT), isovolumetric contraction time (ICT), and ejection time (ET) were measured by echocardiography, and the myocardial performance index (MPI) [(IRT+ICT)/ET] was calculated. IV end-diastolic pressure was calculated for the patients undergoing coronary angiography. Results: In group I, IV end-systolic diameter was greater (3.1 +/- 0.4 cin vs 2.8 +/- 0.4 cm, P < .001) and ejection fraction was lower (64% +/- 6% vs 68% +/- 6%, P < .001) than those of group II. Rapid filling deceleration time and rate was markedly different in group I (respectively, 133 +/- 50 ms vs 166 +/- 24 ins, P < .001; 608 +/- 291 cm/s(2) vs 383 +/- 116 cm/s(2), P < .001). In addition, it was found that LBBB caused shortening of IV diastolic period and ET markedly (respectively, 347 +/- 116 ins vs 394 +/- 106 ms, P = .03; 255 +/- 40 ms, vs 294 +/- 21 ms, P < .001) and prolongation of IRT and ICT (respectively; 124 +/- 36 ins vs 91 +/- 16 ms, 96 +/- 35 in vs 38 +/- 9 ins, P < .001). The MPI was predominantly higher in group I (0.89 +/- 0.29 vs 0.40 +/- 0.06, P < .001). Invasively determined IV end-diastolic pressure was found higher in group I (14 +/- 3 min Hg vs 10 +/- 3 mm. Hg, P < .001). Conclusion: A marked elevation of the IV MPI and end-diastolic pressure, parallel to changes of conventional echocardiographic parameters, in patients with isolated LBBB points out that LBBB causes marked deterioration on IV systolic and diastolic functions.en10.1067/mje.2001.115655info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessArticle14111075107911696831Q1WOS:000172106100006Q2