Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mobile Cardiac Acoustic Monitoring System to Evaluate Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Pacemaker Patients.
Huang, Jingjuan; Zhang, Weiwei; Pan, Changqing; Zhu, Shiwei; Mead, Robert Hardwin; Li, Ruogu; He, Ben.
Afiliación
  • Huang J; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China.
  • Zhang W; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China.
  • Pan C; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China.
  • Zhu S; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China.
  • Mead RH; Silicon Valley Cardiology, East Palo Alto, CA 94303, USA.
  • Li R; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China.
  • He B; Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China.
J Clin Med ; 11(13)2022 Jul 03.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35807146
ABSTRACT
The mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system is a promising tool to enable detection and assist the diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). The objective of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of electromechanical activation time (EMAT), an important cardiac acoustic biomarker, in quantifying LVSD among left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) patients using a mobile acoustic cardiography monitoring system. In this prospective single-center observational study, pacemaker-dependent patients were consecutively enrolled. EMAT, the time from the start of the pacing QRS wave to first heart sound (S1) peak; left ventricular systolic time (LVST), the time from S1 peak to S2 peak; and ECG were recorded simultaneously by the mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system. LVEF was measured by echocardiography. A logistic regression model was applied to evaluate the association between EMAT and reduced EF (LVEF < 50%). A total of 105 pacemaker-dependent patients participated. The RVAP group (n = 58) displayed a significantly higher EMAT than the LBBP group (n = 47) (150.95 ± 19.46 vs. 108.23 ± 12.26 ms, p < 0.001). Pearson correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant negative correlation between EMAT and LVEF (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed the sensitivity and specificity of detecting LVEF to be < 50% when EMAT ≥ 151 ms were 96.00% and 96.97% in the RVAP group. In LBBP patients, the sensitivity and specificity of using EMAT ≥ 110 ms as the cutoff value for the detection of LVEF < 50% were 75.00% and 100.00%. There was no significant difference in LVST with or without LVSD in the RVAP group (p = 0.823) and LBBP group (p = 0.086). Compared to LVST, EMAT was more helpful to identify LVSD in pacemaker-dependent patients. The cutoff point of EMAT for diagnosing LVEF < 50% differed regarding the pacing type. Therefore, the mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system can be used to identify the progress of LVSD in pacemaker patients.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China