Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grubb, N.
Right arrow Articles by Fox, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grubb, N.
Right arrow Articles by Fox, K.

Radiology, Vol 199, 59-64, Copyright © 1996 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Latissimus dorsi muscle: assessment of stimulation after cardiomyoplasty with Doppler US tissue imaging

NR Grubb, GR Sutherland, C Campanella, A Fleming, CJ Sinclair and KA Fox
Department of Cardiology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Scotland.

PURPOSE: To evaluate Doppler ultrasound (US) tissue imaging for assessment of stimulated skeletal muscle contraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven patients were studied after left latissimus dorsi cardiomyoplasty. Myograft contraction programmed on alternate cardiac cycles was assessed with Doppler US tissue imaging. Beat-to-beat variation in inferior wall motion was assessed by examining peak myograft velocities during 10 muscle-assisted and 10 nonassisted cardiac cycles. The temporal relationship between electrostimulation and myograft contraction, changes in cardiac geometry, and the effect of alterations in stimulation voltage and muscle synchronization were assessed. RESULTS: Significant beat-to-beat variation in velocity profile could be detected in the proximal myograft in six patients (P < .05). Potentiation of infero-posterior wall motion was measurable in five patients (mean peak systolic wall velocity: nonassisted, 2.5 cm.sec-1 +/- 0.5 [standard deviation]; assisted, 7.8 cm.sec-1 +/- 6.3). The response between stimulation voltage and inferoposterior wall velocity was sigmoid. CONCLUSION: Doppler US tissue imaging depicted the effects of myostimulator programming on muscle contraction and ventricular wall motion.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1996 by the Radiological Society of North America.