Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘lv dysfunction’

The LV ejection fraction ,  is  the most revered medical parameter for both physicians and cardiologists.There are anesthetists and surgeons , who  do not  operate  a  cardiac patient  without knowing it.There are  physicians  who  do monthly assessment of EF in their patients  with dilated  cardiomyopathy.

Now ,every one is interested to know what is their EF ?  Thanks to the global  information highway .We witness ,   patients who are extremely delighted when their  EF increases from 45% to 48% . Similarly , they get depressed when it falls by 2% .

Why this hoopla around the LV EF ?

Every one knows EF is nothing but a LV contractile force at a particular  beat of the heart . It is possibly a crudest possible way to screen for   LV function.( Of course it can still be useful  in patients  with established myocardial disease to follow up  LV dysfunction)

The  most important caveat in  EF is it’s dependence on the loading conditions  of heart .It is   also  heavily influenced by the  heart rate.We now, even a severely dysfunctional LV can contract vigorously with inotropic stimulation  like dobutamine  or whenever local catecholamines.

Our obsession with EF is complete and it is not expected to get cured in the near future.

There are many hundreds of articles in cardiology literature  which  ridicules the EF as sole parameter for assessing LV function. Still ,  it is the number one parameter to asses LV function  in real world as well as in  vast number of land mark clinical  trials .  Are all those trial  results to be doomed ?

Even as  the  LV EF is   being labeled as  futile index  ,   we  also  realise we have not traveled  far from our great clinical   ancestors . Thousands of  years ago   the Chinese  yellow  emperor  of medicine  found  the cardiac contractility  by pulse volume  and predicted death accurately  ,  probably  better  than the live 3d echocardiography   derived EF   guided by LV volume rendering algorithm !

The purpose of this article is to tell the current generation physicians  there are some simple and probably  accurate  clinical tips  to rule out significant LV dysfunction.

One can confidentially tell  the LV  EF  would  be > 50%  in 99% of population if they have the following !

  • A brisk upstroke of carotid pulse.*
  • A well palpated tapping apical impulse**
  • A Loud  first heart sound(S1)
  • A  totally normal ECG (Even a normal QRS complex  is suffice !) ***
  • Normal CT ratio in Xray chest
  • A  comfortable brisk walk of  at 6 km/hour for 10 m .

* A brisk central arterial pulse is nothing but the reflection of LV DP/DT a sophisticated echo parameter assessed  with much hype ! A good thumb with an   alert brain can accurately tell a given patients dp/dt is within normal range.

** A loud S1 and tapping apical impulse indicate the velocity of closure of  anterior mitral leaflet.Which is in turn reflect the force of contraction of the antero lateral  papillary muscle of LV .So what you hear a loud s1 is nothing but the contractile function of the most important  part of LV namely the pap muscle of LV.

*** A normal ECG ,  generally tells us  all is  well with LV myocardium . Finally,  it makes  immense sense to correlate the functional capacity to EF. (90% correlation)

Final message

Mind you ,  all the above modalities come either  free of cost or a fraction of  echocardiography  . It is estimated up to 90% echocardiography scans to R/O LV dysfunction can be avoided . The global health care costs can be saved and be utilised for some better purpose like protecting our atmospheric shell  from the  hazardous   gases

Note of caution

While ,one can rule out signficant LV dysfunction by above mode  ,  it can miss  other forms of LV dysfunction like relaxation defect etc . (ofcourse the EF also misses it !) .Judicious use of functional  imaging modalities are adviced in those who require it.

Read Full Post »

It is a well known fact  ,   CABG and PCI  provides immediate relief  for patients with angina ,  which is refractory to medical therapy. Of course , this happens only if a critical occlusion of  at least one epicardial coronary artery is  opened . It need to be realised ,  angina  due to  microvascular  disease can not be cured by maintaining  epicardial  patency .

While angina  relief is prompt ,  dyspnea is not ! . If we  believe,  opening  up a  coronary artery  in a patient with LV dysfunction will  restore the LV function  ,  it  is grossly mistaken !

Why is it so ?

Angina  relief requires  simple  restoration  of  oxygen supply and correction of local ischemia .  This happens without any issue as the blood  seeps in to the ischemic cells and soothes the ischemic nerve fibres that trigger the pain signals   . While  ,  for LV function to improve , the blood flow has to be converted to mechanical activity in the form of myocyte actin/myosin interaction. For this,   there need to be an intact  cellular contractile mechanism . The myocyte architecture should be appropriate .In post MI ventricles we know there is  zig zag  orientation of myofibrils due to myocyte slippage that interfere with mechanical recruitment . Further , integrity of  extracellular matrix  namely the collagen frame work is also vital . Note ,  angina relief  is not concerned with any of the above .

And now ,  we also realise  dyspnea  in failing ventricles  is vitally  dependent on diastolic function ,  which is also very much  impaired in ischemic DCM .There is little proof for  PCI/CABG  to correct the  molecular   mysteries in  diastolic dysfunction !

Dysfunctional LV means what ? (read the link )

It is a collection of  variety of myocardial tissues . Viz : Fully  necrosed , partially necrosed ,  ischemic viable, non ischemic viable, ischemic non viable, non ischemic non viable , Apart from this patchy necrosis, patchy ischemic, areas are common. Finally , necrosed segments   may  also be perfused normally by  spontaneous reopening of an IRA.

One can imagine the complexity  of events in these segments  once we do the  PCI /CABG . The response  is highly variable and unpredictable. The major concept we  , the physicians  believe or ( to be precise made to believe !) is  the  sanctity  devoted to  the viable myocardium .For  many us ,  it is considered a  holy  exercise  to identify viable myocardium in patients following MI and then revascularise them if  found to have significant viable myocardium (Atleast 20% of infarcted area )

A full 2 decades were lost or (shall  we   say wasted on this futile exercise !) as   we have since  realised most of the cardiologists do not follow this rule .

Now , even a scarred myocardium is revascularised in the hope of recovery .As such , we have reached a stage where  there is no contradiction for not doing a PCI /CABG   with reference to LV dysfunction.

Now every  patient  with post MI  LV dysfunction  is considered to  have  some amount of viable myocardium that is  fit   enough  for revascularization

Are we justified in doing  this ?

Many clinical  trials  have revealed  , the  recovery of LV function  in these segments  has not been consistent at all .

The most surprising discovery is  a viable myocardium need not  be ischemic   .It might get adequate blood supply either  from invisible collaterals or trickle of antegrade flow .  Hence an adequately  perfused myocardial segment can  still be   non contractile . This shatters the myth  that  revascularisation must have a dramatic effect on the recovery of contractility in all viable segments.

The other major finding is  ,  even ischemic   viable   myocardium ( documented by metabolic activities PET etc)  need not regain it’s original contractility  after the ischemia is fully corrected .

*reference for  both the above statements are available from variety of sources including real life experiences .(Type C evidence )

Final message

  • Do a PCI/CABG promptly for patients with refractory angina.
  • Never  advocate PCI/CABG  for  a primary relief of dyspnea .  (Never is a harsh word,  let it be  “use it  with caution ” ! and  the  patient  should be  revealed  the whole facts  about  what we know and what we do not know regarding the complex  hemodyanmic events  in  revascularisation   )

Counter point

If  the above statements are really true ,   How does PCI/CABG   help  relieving  dyspnea  and functional class  what is your answer for thousands of patients  with CAD and ischemic DCM who have greatly benefited from CABG ?

The answer could  be  simple , The revascularization  piggybacks  over the   medical management (which , these patients pursue vigorously)     like  ACEI,  statins, salt restriction, betablockers  , optimal diuretics and tend to hijack the credits from the poor  drugs !

Read a related blog

Revascularisation for ischemic DCM

Read Full Post »

The answer to this question  is not  easy  , as   one  would tend to believe . In fact this question , takes it for granted     revascularisation  will  improve the LV dysfunction in patients  with severe LV dysfunction.

The truth is , we  are not sure   about the mechanisms . How   revasculariastion  will have an effect  on  chronically dying or dead myocardium  ? (Acutely dying myocardium is a different story, where revascualrisation has a profound effect , that is called salvaging the myocardium )

This  issue is  of great clinical significance  in end stage ischemic heart disease  .A typical  myocardial segment in ischemic cardiomyopathy  has millions of  the dead cells  interwoven with dying cells  with  occasional  clusters if live cells scattered all over .Once the process of myocardial apotosis sets in ,  myocardial cell death does not result  in segmental destruction  instead  an universal cell death.(Paracrine signals of  cell death that spills over to adjacent segments  )  The current standards of revascualrisation (PCI and CABG) aims to provide blood flow  in a segmental fashion. Even if the blood flow is restored in an obstructive vessel it is not clear , how it is going to enter the chronically atrophied myocytes.

Meanwhile , many studies are available   suggesting  coronary revascularisation does indeed improve LV dysfunction. These  evidence has never been  conclusive .Real world experience would also  confirm this  simple fact , that   angina relief is definite following revascularisation but not dyspnea  relief  in patients  with LV dysfunction .

So ,  when seeking the  guidelines  for revascularisation  ( PCI or CABG )  in patients  with CAD one need to ask  this  specific  question

Does the patient has

A.Angina alone

B.Angina and dyspnea

C.Only  dyspnea

If the answer is C ,  assess the patient again , rule out systemic causes of dyspnea (Anemia, renal function etc)  rethink  or postpone  revascularisation.If primary  or secondary LV muscle dysfunction has set in revascularisation has little value.

Also read

Viable myocardium

Read Full Post »