HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 293/5/H2738    most recent 00645.2007v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jaber, W. A. Articles by Redfield, M. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jaber, W. A. Articles by Redfield, M. M.

Revisiting methods for assessing and comparing left ventricular diastolic stiffness: impact of relaxation, external forces, hypertrophy, and comparators

¹Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota; and ²Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

Submitted 5 June 2007 ; accepted in final form 9 August 2007

Understanding diastolic function mandates feasible and accurate methods to construct and compare the diastolic pressure (P)-volume (V) relationship (PVR). This study compared the relaxation-corrected single beat (RC-SB) to the multiple-beat (MB) (vena cava occlusion) method for constructing the diastolic PVR in 26 young normal or old hypertensive dogs before and after increases in afterload (phenylephrine) or acute volume expansion in the presence (n = 14) or absence (n = 12) of the pericardium. The PVR data were fit to P = e^·V. Derived stiffness indexes compared included the stiffness coefficient (), curve-fitting constant (), and the end-diastolic volume (EDV) at 10, 20, or 30 mmHg [EDV_x = ln(P_x/)/] to account for covariance in and . In pericardium-intact young normal and old hypertensive dogs studied over varying afterloads, the MB and RC-SB PVR appeared identical. The (r = 0.62) and (r = 0.69) derived from the RC-SB vs. MB PVR showed moderate correlation but poor agreement. In contrast, the EDV_10–30 derived from RC-SB vs. MB PVR showed excellent correlation (r = 0.97) and agreement. The uncorrected SB method underestimated stiffness. As expected, after acute volume expansion, the RC-SB PVR was shifted upward from the MB PVR (decreased EDV_10–30; P < 0.05) in the pericardium-intact but not pericardium-absent dogs. The RC-SB method can substitute for the MB technique in construction of PVR in the absence of acute volume expansion. The concordance between these two methods was poorly reflected by comparing the derived and but apparent when using EDV_10–30, which provides information regarding the position of the PVR in a single number.

hemodynamics; heart failure; methods; pericardium

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. Zhang and S. J. Kovacs The diastatic pressure-volume relationship is not the same as the end-diastolic pressure-volume relationship Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, June 1, 2008; 294(6): H2750 - H2760. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]