ArticleExperimental and clinical cardiology2002
Afterload- and preload-dependent interactions in the isolated biventricular working rat heart.
Article in Experimental and clinical cardiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Influence of pericardium on ventricular mechanical interdependence in an isolated biventricular working pig heart model.The Journal of physiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe afterload- (AL) and preload- (PL) dependent interactions between the left and right ventricle (LV, RV, respectively) of an isolated biventricular ejecting rat heart were measured in terms of left (L) and right (R) intraventricular peak pressure (LP(max) and RP(max), respectively) and aortic and pulmonary flow (AF, PF, respectively).
methodsStarting with standardized loading conditions, LVPL was varied in six steps for each of five distinct LVALs (n=28) and then RVPL was varied in seven steps for each of five distinct RVALs (n=37). Thus, the entire range of loading conditions was covered.
resultsIdentification of AL-dependent systolic interactions revealed an important DeltaLP(max)-DeltaRP(max) gain of 0.25 (r(2)=0.78) and a still more dominant DeltaRP(max)-DeltaPF gain of 0.45 (r(2)=0.84). At least 26% of maximal PF were attributable to LV systolic function. In contrast, R-L systolic interaction impeded PF; there was no global crosstalk pressure gain and no ipsilateral pressure-flow gain. Reduction of RV activity augmented AF by at least 15%. PL-dependent L-R interactions were absent except for minimal LVAL. In contrast, the reverse interaction reflected an inverse correlation between RVPL and AF, which is coincidential with other studies (-11% AF for a doubling of the standard RVPL). For the minimal RVAL, there was a biphasic response of AF to RVPL. Unloading the maximally loaded RV revealed an overall inhibition of AF by 37% for the standardized LV. Unloading the standardized RV revealed a basal inhibition of AF by 6% for the standardized LV and a 4.5% augmentation for the highly loaded LV. Consequently, basal contribution of RV to LV performance depended on the conditions of LV loading.
conclusionsThe authors suggest a unidirectional transseptal R-L mechanism for diastolic interactions, and transseptal L-R and paraseptal R-L mechanisms for systolic interactions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19644589PMC2716989What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.