Biomedical subjects

Richard N M Cornelussen

Publications and source records attributed to Richard N M Cornelussen.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Calculation of effective VV interval facilitates optimization of AV delay and VV interval in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: In hearts with left bundle branch block (LBBB), both atrioventricular (AV) delay and interventricular (VV) interval determine left ventricular (LV) pump function in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The optimal combination of AV delay and VV interval currently is determined by extensive hemodynamic testing. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the effective VV interval (VV(eff)) can be used to optimize AV delay and VV interval. METHODS: In eight canine hearts with chronic LBBB, LV pacing was performed at various AV delays as well as biventricular pacing at multiple AV delays and VV intervals. LV pump function was assessed from LVdP/dt(max) and stroke volume (conductance catheter). Interventricular asynchrony was calculated from the timing difference between upslope of LV and RV pressure curves. VV(eff) was defined as the time delay between activation of the RV apex and LV lateral wall, irrespective of the source of RV activation (RV pacing or intrinsic conduction). VV(eff) was determined from pacemaker settings and surface ECGs recorded during biventricular pacing at various AV delays (positive values denote LV preexcitation). RESULTS: For all animals, the relationship between VV(eff) and LVdP/dt(max) as well as LV stroke work was parabolic. Maximal improvement in LVdP/dt(max) was similar during LV pacing, simultaneous biventricular pacing, and sequential biventricular pacing and was obtained at similar values of VV(eff). VV(eff) was strongly correlated with interventricular asynchrony (R = 0.97 +/- 0.03). Optimum LVdP/dt(max) occurred at VV(eff) ranging from -24 to 12 ms (mean -6 +/- 13 ms). For each experiment, the optimal VV(eff) was virtually equal to the value halfway between its minimum (during LV pacing at short AV delay) and maximum (during LBBB) value (R = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Use of VV(eff) facilitates determination of the best combination of AV delay and VV interval during biventricular pacing. For each individual heart, VV(eff), resulting in optimum LV pump function, can be estimated using surface ECGs recorded during biventricular pacing.

Animals↗

PubMed2004

Left bundle branch block induces ventricular remodelling and functional septal hypoperfusion.

AIMS: Left ventricular (LV) dilatation, hypertrophy, and septal perfusion defects are frequently observed in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). We investigated whether isolated LBBB causes these abnormalities. METHODS AND RESULTS: In eight dogs, LBBB was induced by radio frequency ablation. Two-dimensional echocardiography showed that 16 weeks of LBBB decreased LV ejection fraction (by 23+/-14%) and increased LV cavity volume (by 25+/-19%) and wall mass (by 17+/-16%). The LV septal-to-lateral wall mass ratio decreased by 6+/-9%, indicating asymmetric hypertrophy. After onset of LBBB, myocardial blood flow (MBF, fluorescent microspheres) and systolic circumferential shortening [CS(sys), magnetic resonance (MR) tagging] decreased in the septum to 83+/-16% and -11+/-20% of baseline, respectively, and increased in LV lateral wall to 118+/-12% and 180+/-90% of baseline, respectively. MBF and CS(sys) values did not change over 16 weeks of LBBB. Changes in external mechanical work paralleled those in CS(sys). Glycogen content was not significantly different between septum and LV lateral wall of LBBB hearts (16 weeks) and control samples, indicating absence of hibernation. CONCLUSIONS: The asynchronous ventricular activation during LBBB leads to redistribution of circumferential shortening and myocardial blood flow and, in the long run, LV remodelling. Septal hypoperfusion during LBBB appears to be primarily determined by reduced septal workload.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Intra-ventricular resynchronization for optimal left ventricular function during pacing in experimental left bundle branch block.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate to what extent intra-ventricular asynchrony (intraVA) and inter-ventricular asynchrony (interVA) determine left ventricular (LV) function in canine hearts with left bundle branch block (LBBB) during ventricular pacing. BACKGROUND: Pacing therapy improves LV pump function in patients with heart failure and abnormal ventricular conduction supposedly due to resynchronization. However, the relationship between LV pump function and measures of asynchrony is not well established. METHODS: In 15 experiments, LV (various sites) and biventricular (BiV) pacing was performed at atrioventricular (AV) delays of 20 to 140 ms. Measured were the maximum rate of increase (dP/dt(max)) of LV pressure and LV stroke work (SW) (conductance catheter), interVA (time delay between the upslope of LV and RV pressures), and intraVA (from endocardial electrical activation maps). RESULTS: Induction of LBBB increased interVA (-6.4 +/- 8.6 to -28.4 +/- 8.5 ms [RV earlier]) and intraVA (4.9 +/- 2.4 to 18.0 +/- 3.3 ms), whereas LV dP/dt(max) and SW decreased (-13 +/- 18% and -39 +/- 24%, respectively). During LBBB, LV and BiV pacing increased LV dP/dt(max) and SW (mean increases 14% to 21% and 11% to 15%, respectively) without changing diastolic function or preload. Optimal improvement in LV function was obtained consistently when intraVA returned to pre-LBBB values, while interVA remained elevated. Normalization of intraVA required AV delays shorter than the baseline PQ time during LV apex and BiV pacing, thus excluding endogenous LV activation, but AV delays virtually equal to the baseline PQ time (difference 4 +/- 9 ms, p = NS) during pacing at (mid)lateral LV sites to obtain fusion between pacing-induced and endogenous activation. CONCLUSIONS: In LBBB hearts, optimal restoration of LV systolic function by pacing requires intra-ventricular resynchronization. The optimal AV delay to achieve this depends on both the site of pacing and baseline PQ time.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Proteins involved in salvage of the myocardium.

In the Western world, cardiac ischemic disease is still the most common cause of death despite significant improvements of therapeutic drugs and interventions. The fact that the heart possesses an intrinsic protection mechanism has been systematically overlooked before the 1980s. It has been clearly shown that the activation of this mechanism can reduce the infarct size after an ischemic insult. Prerequisite is the induction of the synthesis of such cardio-protective proteins as heat shock proteins (HSPs) and anti-oxidative enzymes. HSPs are involved in the maintenance of cell homeostasis by guiding the synthesis, folding and degradation of proteins. Besides, the various family members cover a broad spectrum of anti-oxidative, anti-apoptotic and anti-inflammatory activities. Although the major inducible HSP72 has received most attention, other HSPs are able to confer cardioprotection as well. In addition, it seems that there is a concerted action between the various cardio-protective proteins. One drawback is that the beneficial effects of HSPs seem to be less effective in the compromised than in the normal heart. Although clinical studies have shown that there is a therapeutic potential for HSPs in the compromised heart, major efforts are needed to fully understand the role of HSPs in these hearts and to find a safe and convenient way to activate these protective proteins.

Animals↗