Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: EC:1.1.1.194 (CAD)
 4,384 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Calculations about the variability of PVCs are usually based upon the results of two Holter ECGs, either successive ones or separated by a short interval. No studies are available indicating whether the criteria calculated for short control intervals also holds true when evaluating chronic antiarrhythmic treatment over longer control periods. This study was performed to investigate the influence of the length of the control interval on the spontaneous variability and thus on the reduction of PVCs required to secure an antiarrhythmic effect. In a prospective study, 444 ambulatory ECGs were obtained in 90 patients with CAD or IDC and untreated ventricular arrhythmia of Lown grade IV. Patient follow-up was carried out over an average of 181 +/- 297 days. The degree of arrhythmia was expressed as the mean hourly PVC rate. The variability of PVC counts between two Holter ECGs was defined as the logarithm of the quotient PVCday 2(n + 1)/PVCday 1(n + 1). The spontaneous distribution of variability quotients was defined separately (mean +/- 2 SD) for each of four ranges of control intervals (0-6 days, 7-89 days, 90-364 days, greater than or equal to 365 days). The per cent reduction (R) in PVC frequency necessary to establish drug efficacy, was calculated according to the formula R (%) = 10(0)-10(-2SD) X 100, whereas the percentage change necessary to prove aggravation of arrhythmia (A) was assessed by the formula A (%) = 10(0)+10(+2SD X 100. R increased from 63% (0-6 days), 81% (7-89 days), 93% (90-364 days) to 98% (greater than or equal to 365 days).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:[Spontaneous variability of ventricular extrasystoles: criteria for validating anti-arrhythmia therapy in relation to the length of the control interval]. 244 34

In a prospective study, the influence of the length of the time interval on spontaneous variability was investigated in 100 patients with CAD or IDC and untreated ventricular arrhythmia of Lown grade IV. Patient follow-up was carried out over 260 +/- 387 days. In each of the 498 ambulatory Holter tapes, the mean hourly arrhythmia count (AC) of couplets and salvos was verified. The variability of ACs between two Holter ECGs was defined as the logarithm of the quotient AC day 2(n + 0.01)/AC day 1(n + 0.01). The spontaneous distribution of variability quotients (means +/- 2 SD) was defined separately for couplets and salvos and for each of four ranges of control intervals (0-6 days, 7-89 days, 90-364 days, greater than or equal to 365 days). The percentage change in arrhythmia count necessary to establish drug efficacy (R), was calculated according to the formula R(%) = (10(0) - 10(-2SD].100, whereas the percentage change necessary to prove aggravation of arrhythmia (A) was assessed by the formula A(%) = (10(0) + 10(+2SD].100. For couplets, R extended from 90%, 94%, 98% to 99%; A increased from 1114%, 1895%, 6153% to 14032%, respectively. For salvos, R remained almost unchanged at a high level with 95%, 98%, 98%, 99%. The figures of A were 2189%, 4650%, 5698% and 9650%, respectively. It is concluded that the spontaneous variability of complex ventricular arrhythmias is remarkably high with short control intervals and increases further with longer ones.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:[Spontaneous variability of complex ventricular extrasystoles over a period of up to 4 years]. 245 24

This study was designed to compare baroreceptor sensitivity and heart rate variability as measures of cardiac autonomic tone in patients with coronary disease (CAD, n = 49) and idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDC, n = 130). Time domain heart rate variability, including SDNN, SDANN, and pNN50, was determined during 24-hour Holter ECG. Baroreflex sensitivity was analyzed nonivasively using the phenylephrine method. Baroreflex sensitivity and heart rate variability were comparable between patients with CAD versus IDC (baroreflex sensitivity: 6.1 +/- 3 vs 6.9 +/- 5 ms/mmHg; SDNN: 97 +/- 40 vs 114 +/- 41 ms; SDANN: 83 +/- 33 vs 99 +/- 41 ms; pNN50: 3.9 +/- 4 vs 9.6 +/- 13 ms, P = NS for all comparisons). Likewise, a subgroup analysis of patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < or = 30% showed no significant difference in baroreceptor sensitivity and heart rate variability between IDC and CAD patients. Patients with CAD and an LVEF > 30% had a decreased heart rate variability but not a decreased baroreflex sensitivity compared to patients with IDC and LVEF > 30% (baroreflex sensitivity: 6.4 +/- 4 vs 8.3 +/- 6 ms/mmHg, P = NS; SDNN: 98 +/- 19 vs 128 +/- 42 ms, P < 0.05; SDANN: 86 +/- 21 vs 112 +/- 43 ms, P < 0.05; pNN50: 4.2 +/- 3 vs 12.3 +/- 8 ms, P < 0.05). Patients with a markedly depressed LVEF show comparable alterations in cardiac autonomic tone whether they have CAD or IDC. Patients with CAD and preserved LV function, however, have a decreased heart rate variability compared to patients with IDC and preserved LV function. The prognostic significance of these findings will be determined prospectively in a large patient cohort at our institution.
 ...
PMID:Baroreflex sensitivity and heart rate variability in coronary disease compared to dilated cardiomyopathy. 982 59