ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2022
Desynchronization Strain Patterns and Contractility in Left Bundle Branch Block through Computer Model Simulation.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- QRS-Corrected Prediction of the Diastolic Rest Period for Coronary CT Angiography in Patients with Complete Left Bundle Branch Block.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- Parameter subset reduction for imaging-based digital twin generation of patients with left ventricular mechanical discoordination.Biomedical engineering online · 2024Article
- The saga of dyssynchrony imaging: Are we getting to the point.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with specific septal-to-lateral wall activation patterns which are strongly influenced by the intrinsic left ventricular (LV) contractility and myocardial scar localization. The objective of this study was to propose a computational-model-based interpretation of the different patterns of LV contraction observed in the case of LBBB and preserved contractility or myocardial scarring. Two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography was used to obtain LV volumes and deformation patterns in three patients with LBBB: (1) a patient with non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, (2) a patient with antero-septal myocardial scar, and (3) a patient with lateral myocardial scar. Scar was confirmed by the distribution of late gadolinium enhancement with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI). Model parameters were evaluated manually to reproduce patient-derived data such as strain curves obtained from echocardiographic apical views. The model was able to reproduce the specific strain patterns observed in patients. A typical septal flash with pre-ejection shortening, rebound stretch, and delayed lateral wall activation was observed in the case of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. In the case of lateral scar, the contractility of the lateral wall was significantly impaired and septal flash was absent. In the case of septal scar, septal flash and rebound stretch were also present as previously described in the literature. Interestingly, the model was also able to simulate the specific contractile properties of the myocardium, providing an excellent localization of LV scar in ischemic patients. The model was able to simulate the electromechanical delay and specific contractility patterns observed in patients with LBBB of ischemic and non-ischemic etiology. With further improvement and validation, this technique might be a useful tool for the diagnosis and treatment planning of heart failure patients needing CRT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.