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) 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 PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Kerem M. Vural Oguz Tasdemir Onurcan K. Tarcan Kemal Bayazit Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Vural, K. M. Articles by Bayazit, K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vural, K. M. Articles by Bayazit, K.

Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:1231-1234
© 1998 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Optimization of Synchronization Delay in Latissimus Dorsi Dynamic Cardiomyoplasty

^a Cardiovascular Surgery Department, Türkiye Yüksek Ihtisas Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

Accepted for publication November 28, 1997.

Address reprint requests to Dr Vural, N. Tandogan cad. 5/6 Kavaklidere 06540, Ankara, Turkey
e-mail: (kvural{at}tr-net.net.tr)

Background. Optimal synchronization delay (SD) for triggering the implanted cardiomyostimulators in patients undergoing latissimus dorsi dynamic cardiomyoplasty has not been clearly defined. Generally a synchronization delay time of 45 to 60 ms is used in the current practice, in which the implanted cardiomyostimulator stimulates the latissimus dorsi muscle 45 to 60 ms after mitral valve closure acquired with M-mode echocardiography. We investigated the effect of shortening or prolonging the delay time on cardiac functions.

Methods. We studied 10 patients who were in their first 2 years postoperatively. Three values for SD (SD = 0 ms, 45 to 60 ms, and 150 to 160 ms) were echocardiographically evaluated for their influence on both systolic and diastolic left ventricular parameters.

Results. Ejection fractions were 0.27 ± 0.07, 0.28 ± 0.07, and 0.32 ± 0.06; peak aortic velocities were 0.85 ± 0.8, 0.86 ± 0.11, and 0.92 ± 0.8 m/s; and velocity-time integrals were 0.16 ± 0.03, 0.16 ± 0.03, and 0.19 ± 0.03 m for the SD values of 0, 45 to 60 ms, and 150 to 160 ms, respectively. Diastolic parameters were also measured. Isovolumetric diastolic relaxation time was 97.5 ± 49, 97.20 ± 44, and 111.8 ± 49 ms; deceleration time was 83.67 ± 32, 88.48 ± 35, and 92.68 ± 34 ms; and ratio or velocity-time integral of e wave to velocity-time integral of a wave was 3.09 ± 0.98, 2.48 ± 0.69, and 2.38 ± 0.65 for the SD values of 0, 45 to 60 ms, and 150 to 160 ms, respectively. Systolic functions were better when SD was set at 150 to 160 ms, but there was a diastolic compromise. On the other hand, diastolic parameters were more favorable when SD = 0 (ie, cardiomyostimulator triggered without delay) but the systolic assist was suboptimal. Systolic and diastolic parameters seemed relatively well-balanced with the current practice of setting the synchronization delay at 45 to 60 ms.

Conclusions. The most favorable systolic effects were obtained with a prolonged delay of synchronization (150 to 160 ms), at some expense of diastolic functions. On the other hand, with a short or absent delay, diastolic parameters were improved but systolic parameters became suboptimal. Therefore, the current practice of setting the SD between 45 and 60 ms after echocardiographic mitral valve closure is suggested for the optimal timing for cardiomyostimulator stimulation in patients who have undergone latissimus dorsi dynamic cardiomyoplasty. Yet a great deal of individualization is necessary, and fixed preset values cannot definitely be determined because one setting does not fit all patients.