GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Keywords: Forschungsbericht ; Krankenhausaufenthalt ; Herzinfarktpatient ; Qualitätsmanagement ; Datensatz ; Anonymisierung ; Matching
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (43 Seiten, 738 KB) , Diagramme
    Language: German
    Note: Förderkennzeichen BMBF 01GY1112 , Unterschiede zwischen dem gedruckten Dokument und der elektronischen Ressource können nicht ausgeschlossen werden
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    ISSN: 1542-474X
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the clinical value of QT analysis from Holter recordings in patients after myocardial infarction (Ml).Background: Prolongation and dispersion of QT intervals in the 12-lead standard ECG have been proposed as indicators of risk for arrhythmic events. However, the value of QT and T wave measurements from Holter recordings has yet to be established.Methods: Intervals from Q to the peak and to the end of T were determined every 30 seconds from 24-hour Holter recordings and corrected for cycle length (QTc). The duration of late repolarization was calculated as QT end minus QT peak. 24-hour QT variability was determined as the standard error of estimate from the linear regression analysis of QT and RR intervals. In a case control design, 51 post-MI patients suffering from subsequent cardiac death within 1 year were compared to 51 post-MI patients with an uncomplicated follow-up.Results: QTc intervals as well as 24-hour QT variability did not differ between post-MI patients with favorable and unfavorable clinical outcome. However, there was a prolonged interval from the peak to the end of the T wave in cardiac death victims (mean ± SE: 110 ± 4 ms) as compared to controls (95 ± 3ms, P 〈 0.001).Conclusions: Prolongation of the late repolarization phase seems to be associated with an increased risk of cardiac death after Ml. Standard QT measurements from ambulatory ECG recordings have no predictive value in post-MI patients.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 21 (1998), S. 0 
    ISSN: 1540-8159
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Dispersion of ventricular repolarization, assessed as QT dispersion in the ECG or by multiple monophasic action potential (MAP) recordings, is defined as the difference between the earliest and latest repolarization. It is thus measured in the time domain. However, myocardial refractoriness is primarily a function of the membrane potential during phase 3 repolarization. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to measure dispersion of ventricular repolarization in the voltage domain and to study its relation to VF inducibility. To further validate this concept, the effects of chronic amiodarone treatment on the voltage dispersion were assessed. MAPs were recorded simultaneously at 10 epicardial and endocardial sites in isolated rabbit hearts, both under baseline conditions (n = 8) and after chronic amiodarone treatment (n = 8). Repolarization dispersion in the voltage domain was calculated as the difference between the highest and lowest repolarization level of all 10 MAPs at 10-ms steps, starting from the MAP plateau level to complete repolarization. Plotting these voltage differences along the time axis resulted in a dispersion curve, which rose during early repolarization, reached a peak during phase 3 repolarization, and thereafter declined toward zero. There was a close correlation between VF vulnerability in response to electrical field stimuli and the time during which voltage dispersion was maximal (r = 0.828, P 〈 0.0001). Amiodarone caused a right-ward shift of both the dispersion curve (P = 0.007) and VF vulnerability (P = 0.025), but did not change the magnitude nor the shape of the voltage dispersion curve and its relation to VF vulnerability. Repolarization dispersion in the voltage domain describes an alternate approach for evaluating the heterogeneity of ventricular repolarization and may help to characterize arrhythmia susceptibility under experimental conditions.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology 8 (1997), S. 0 
    ISSN: 1540-8167
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Shock-induced Dispersion and VF Induction. Introduction: Shock-induced dispersion of ventricular repolarization (SIDR) caused by an electrical field stimulus has been suggested as a mechanism of ventricular fibrillation (VF) induction: however, this hypothesis has not been studied systematically in the intact heart. Likewise, the mechanism underlying the upper (ULV) and lower (LLV) limit of vulnerability remains unclear. Methods and Results: In eight Langendorff-perfused rabbit hearts, monophasic action potentials were recorded simultaneously from ten different sites of both ventricles. Truncated biphasic T wave shocks were randomly delivered at various coupling intervals and strengths, exceeding the vulnerable window, ULV, and LLV. SIDR, defined as the difference between the longest and shortest postshock repolarization times, was 64 ± 15 msec for sbocks inducing VF. SIDR was 41 ± 17 msec for shocks delivered above the ULV, and 33 ± 14 and 27 ± 8 msec for shocks delivered 10 msec before and after the vulnerable window, respectively (all P 〈 0.01 vs VF-inducing shocks). Although SIDR was larger for shocks delivered below the LLV(93 ± 24 msec, P 〈 0.01 vs VF-inducing shocks), the repolarization extension was significantly smaller for shocks below the LLV (10.3%± 3.9% vs 16.3%± 4.9%, P 〈 0.01). Conclusion: SIDR is influenced by the shock timing and intensity. Large SIDR within the vulnerable window and an SIDR decrease toward its borders suggest that SIDR is essential for VF induction. The decrease in SIDR toward greater shock strengths may explain the ULV. Small repolarization extension for shocks below the LLV may explain why these shocks, despite producing large SIDR, fail to induce VF.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 20 (1997), S. 0 
    ISSN: 1540-8159
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: The upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) has been used in clinical studies to predict the DFT in patients with ICDs. Despite the ULV-DFT correlation, uncertainties about the optimal timing of the ULV determination remain. Previous studies using monophasic or biphasic shock waveforms reported differences in the ULV timing with respect to the electrocardiographic T wave. The purpose of this study was to directly compare the ULV timing for mono- versus biphasic T wave shocks. In ten isolated rabbit hearts, mono- and biphasic shocks were delivered randomly during the vulnerable window and at varying shock strengths to determine the ULV. The ULV timing was expressed as the coupling interval at the ULV, the myocardial repolarization state at the ULV measured by monophasic action potential recordings, and the relation between the ULV and the peak of the simultaneously recorded volume conducted T wave. The ULV for biphasic shocks occurred at longer coupling intervals than for monophasic shocks (188.0 ± 9.5 ms vs 173.5 ± 8.8 ms, P 〈 0.001). This resulted in a more repolarized myocardial state at the ULV for biphasic than for monophasic shocks (81.1%± 7.5% vs 66.9%± 9.0%, P = 0.002). The ULV for monophasic shocks occurred predominantly during the upslope of the T wave (8.0 ± 9.7 ms before the peak of the T wave) whereas the ULV for biphasic shocks occurred at or after the peak of the T wave (5.9 ± 9.3 ms after the peak of the T wave) (P 〈 0.001). Biphasic shocks delay the timing of the ULV as compared to monophasic shocks. This is important for the prediction of the DFT by ULV measurements.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 20 (1997), S. 0 
    ISSN: 1540-8159
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: The most recent studies have made it clear that the prognosis of asymptomatic post-MI patients has significantly improved in the last two decades. Holter monitoring as well as a low LyEF still is an important method for the risk stratification in the thrombolytic era of patients with post-MI. Patients with normal noninvasive tests do have a good prognosis. The electrophysiological stimulation seems to be the clinically most valuable single method to predict arrhythmic events. However, as an invasive procedure it is not suitable as a screening test for a large cohort. The stepwise risk stratification technique using first noninvasive followed by invasive procedures seem to be most suitable and effective for identifying asymptomatic infarct survivors which incidence of arrhythmic events is as high as the recurrence rate of patients who had been resuscitated from ventricular fibrillation. Consequently, prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in asymptomatic MI patients, whose positive predictive value is around 30% becomes more and more interesting.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    ISSN: 1540-8167
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Myocardial Vulnerability to T Wave Shocks. Introduction: Induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) by T wave shocks is of clinical interest due to the correlation between the upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) and the defibrillation threshold (DFT). However, the ULV bas not yet been defined precisely in reference to the entire “area of vulnerability” (AOV), which is defined bifunctionally by both shock strengths and shock coupling intervals, nor has it been related to the dispersion of ventricular repolarization, considered to be an important determinant of vulnerability. Methods and Results: In 11 isolated perfused rabbit hearts immersed in a tissue bath containing a 3-lead ECG recording system and two opposite plate electrodes for field shock administration, 7 monophasic action potentials (MAPs) were recorded simultaneously from different epicardial and endocardial regions of the right and left ventricles. An average of 90 ± 25 monophasic waveform shocks of varying shock strengths and coupling intervals were delivered to each heart to determine the horizontal and vertical boundaries of the AOV. The AOV approximated a rhomboid with homogenous VF inducibility. The ULV and lower limit of vulnerability (LLV) represented discrete corners of the AOV with significant changes in VF inducibility if either shock coupling intervals or shock strength were changed by only 10 msec or 10 V. respectively (P 〈 0.001). The ULV occurred at 7 ± 10 msec shorter coupling intervals than the LLV (P 〈 0.05), and VF-inducing shock strengths at the left corner of the AOV were 50 ± 67 V higher as compared to the right corner (P 〈 0.01). The maximal range of VF-inducing coupling intervals coincided (within 〈 2 msec) with the dispersion of MAPs at 70% repolarization, and the ULV coupling interval coincided (within 〈 4 msec) with the longest repolarization at 50%. Conclusions: (1) VF vulnerability to monophasic T wave shocks is defined by an AOV that bas the shape of a leftward tilted rhomboid. (2) Both the ULV and LLV are sharply defined upper and lower corners of the AOV rhomboid. (3) The width of the AOV corresponds to the dispersion of ventricular repolarization at the 70% level. (4) Considering the dispersion of ventricular repolarization may yield more precise ULV determinations and a better understanding of the correlation between the ULV and DFT.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Springer
    Cardiac electrophysiology review 1 (1997), S. 301-303 
    ISSN: 1573-725X
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Medicine
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...