Cardiovascular Issues in CFS/ME Part III: Assessing Diastolic Heart Failure by Cort Johnson
The Sieverling paper reports Dr. Cheney believes
diastolic heart failure lies at the heart of CFS. This papers presents an
overview of what diastolic dysfunction is, how it is diagnosed, and how it is
treated.
The Diastolic Phase
– The first thing to note is that
the heart is an elastic muscle; it distends to fill up with enough blood and
then explosively contracts to pump
the blood to the rest of the body.
First the deoxygenated blood from the veins
enters into the right chamber (ventricle) of the heart where it is gently pumped to the
lungs and oxygenated. From the lungs it flows into the upper chamber of the left side of
the heart called the left atrium. Upon opening of the mitral valve it enters the left ventricule. As
ventricle reaches its maximum point of
expansion the mitral valve opens and the blood from the left atrium begins to
fill it. This wave of blood entering the left ventricule is called the ‘E" wave.
When the two chambers have an equal amount of blood a contraction occurs and
that forces more blood nto the left ventricle. The wave of blood caused by this
contraction is called the "A" wave. The process of ventricular
relaxation and filling is called the diastolic phase.
Once the left ventricle is filled ventricular
contraction occurs and oxygenated blood is pumped through the aorta into the
body. This is the systolic phase. In a blood pressure reading such as 120/80,
120 indicates the peak pressure produced by the contraction of the ventricle as
it pumps blood through the body during systole; 80 represents the lowest
pressure reached as the left ventricle dilates to fill with blood. The force of
the systolic contraction can be felt in the pulse.
The problem in diastolic dysfunction, then, is not
a problem with pumping but with filling. Diastolic dysfunction occurs when the
left ventricle of the heart is unable to fill with normal amounts of blood.
There are essentially two components to
diastolic dysfunction; (1) the left ventricle becomes unable to relax enough to
receive proper amounts of blood during the first phase of filling (relaxation),
and/or (2) it becomes too stiff to accommodate the blood propelled into it by
the atrial contraction during last phase. The heart, for a time, can make up for impaired ventricular relaxation by forcing more blood into
the left ventricle but eventually the left ventricle becomes so stiff that no
level of increased contraction can compensate and reduced cardiac output occurs.
It is only in the last stages of diastolic
dysfunction, stroke volume is impacted.
Diastolic dysfunction and
symptom expression
– Clinically diastolic heart
failure presents in a similar way as systolic heart failure. The cardinal symptoms are
shortness of breath, first upon exertion, but eventually extending to standing
and while at rest. ‘The dominant and most recognizable symptom of congestive
heart failure is ‘shortness of breath’. ‘The other typical complaint is
fatigue’ (Francis et. al 2000). Other common symptoms include wheezing
and coughing as well as nausea and vomiting and edema (bloating) in the
extremities. Swelling of the ankles, particularly at days end, is often the
first symptom that brings a patient into a physician’s office. The veins of the
neck are often distended and the upper right abdomen may ache. A cardiovascular
examination often finds distinctive heart (‘gallop’, knock, murmurs, ‘heave’)
and lung sounds (‘rales’) (Francis et. al. 2000).
These are all signs of blood backing up and
causing problems either in the lungs or in the lower extremities. As the left
ventricle becomes less and less able to accept the blood presented to it, the
blood backs up into the venous circulation causing edema. As left ventricular
hypertrophy and/or stiffening proceeds blood can back up into the left atrium inhibiting circulation to the lungs and
causing shortened breath as well as coughing, wheezing and lung sounds (rales)
(Hanes et. al. 2005). Some signs are more common to diastolic dysfunction than
systolic dysfunction (ventricular hypertrophy, edema, lung sounds) and vice
versa but it is impossible to differentiate the two simply during a
clinical examination.
Note that the extent of heart failure can be
estimated simply through an analysis of physical activity limitations:
- Stage I – no limitations of physical
activity, ordinary physical activity does not lead to undue fatigue or
shortness of breath
- Stage II – slight limitation of physical
activity is seen. Patient is comfortable at rest or ordinary physical
activity results in fatigue, palpitations or shortness of breath
- Stage III – marked limitations of
physical activity are seen. Patient is comfortable at rest but even
slight physical activity causes fatigue, palpitations or shortness of
breath.
- Stage IV – symptoms of cardiac
insufficiency are present at rest, and discomfort is increased with any
physical activity.
Note that it is possible to be in the initial
stages of heart failure and be asymptomatic. If, as Dr. Cheney suggests, heart
failure is the cause of the activity limitations present in CFS then most CFS
patients appear to be in stages III or IV.
Diagnosing diastolic
dysfunction: laboratory tests
- While systolic heart dysfunction is
easily characterized using tests of ejection fraction diagnosing diastolic
dysfunction is more difficult. Ejection fraction is
the percentage of blood expelled by the heart during systole. Only one test - left ventricular
end diastolic pressure (LVEDP) - can reliably determine diastolic dysfunction (Zile
et. al. 2001). LVEDP
is the pressure in
the left ventricule just prior to systole. Measuring LVEDP, however, requires cardiac catheritization, an invasive and
expensive procedure, and is not commonly done.
This does not mean diagnosing diastolic
dysfunction (DD) is not achievable, it simply means it is not simple.
Since there are no other single measures other than LVEDP that are universally abnormal in
patients with heart failure it has been difficult for the medical community to
come to agreement over which set of tests
reliably confirm it (Zile et. al. 2001, Francis et. al. 2000, Skaluba and
Irwin 2004). Taking a very conservative approach, an influential American
group, the Farmington Heart Study Group, asserts diastolic heart failure is
definite only when invasive tests show diastolic abnormalities shortly
after an acute cardiac event. Taking a more liberal approach the European Group
on Diastolic Heart Failure posits that diastolic heart failure can be reliably
addressed based on symptoms and signs (shortened breath during exercise,
particular heart and lung sounds, and measures taken mostly by echocardiography
(E/A ratio, deceleration time, IVRT, etc.) (Galdierisi 2005).
Echocardiography
– Next to cardiac catheritization echocardiography is the best means of
assessing diastolic dysfunction. Unfortunately none of the measures of
echocardiography are consistently abnormal in all patients with diastolic heart failure.
Nor as we shall see are the abnormalities measured by echocardiography well
correlated with independent measures of functioning such as exercise capacity or
with the gold standard of diastolic dysfunction, LVEDP. Given the entire battery
of tests provided by echocardiography, however, most sources suggest a physician should be able to
fairly confidently diagnose diastolic dysfunction in patients with symptoms of heart
failure.
E/A ratio
- Two measures commonly used are
‘transmitral velocity’ and deceleration. As noted above the blood flow across the mitral valve
into the left ventricle occurs in two phases; first during ‘E’ wave or ‘relaxation’ phase,
it passively flows from the full left atrium into the near empty left ventricle;
second, during the ‘A’ wave, after an equilibrium between the chambers is
reached the left atrium contracts and forces more blood into the left ventricle.
The E and A wave tests measure the velocity of blood across the mitral valve.
- (1) Reduced relaxation stage -
In this first stage of diastolic dysfunction the left ventricule is
unable to relax enough to accept normal amounts of blood during the first
(E) phase of ventricular filling. A reduced relaxation phase manifests
itself as reduced E/A wave ratio. An E/A wave ratio of less than .75 is
considered to be indicative of diastolic dysfunction. Some controversy
exists, however, how important a low E/A ratio, are. Because only a
small fraction of people (2-3%) with a low E/A ratio have signs or symptoms of heart failure a low E/A ratio is not necessarily evidence of significant diastolic
dysfunction or diastolic heart failure (Skaluba and Irwin 2004). (See
below).
(2) Pseudonormal stage–
Interestingly, as diastolic dysfunction proceeds the E/A ratio normalizes;
i.e. achieves a pseudonormal appearance (between .75 and 1.5). This occurs when the increased stiffness of the
left ventricule inhibits blood flow during the later phase (A wave). Since
reduced ventricular relaxation has already contributed to a reduced E wave,
both waves now appear to be in the proper proportion and the E/A ratio is
normal.
Distinguishing a normal E/A
wave ratio from a pseudonormal one requires looking at other measures.
Patients with a pseudonormal pattern and moderate diastolic dysfunction
almost always have an enlarged left atrium. These patients
also typically experience shortened breath during exertion and have moderate
functional impairment (NYHA IIa-III). The amplitude of their Ar wave is
usually larger than 25 cm/sec. and its duration usually exceeds that of the
A wave. Loading tests such as the Valsalva maneuver should indicate
abnormalities. (3) Restrictive stage -
In the final stage of diastolic
dysfunction called the restrictive filling stage, as left ventricular enlargement and fibrosis prevents the left ventricule from expanding during the atrial
contraction phase, the E/A ratio reverses and a high E/A ratio is seen
(>1.5). In this stage the left ventricle has become so stiff
that no amount of atrial contraction can force more blood into it. Because
of this almost all the blood it receives occurs during the first (relaxation) phase. In this stage
blood build up in the left atrium increases blood pressure to the point that
the mitral valve opens before a peak pressure gradient is produced.
This further reduces filling during the relaxation period.
|
STAGE |
E/A RATIO |
|
Normal |
Between .75 & 1.5 |
|
1 (reduced relaxation) |
<.75 |
|
2 (psuedonormal) |
Between .75 and 1.5 |
|
3 (restrictive) |
>1.5 |
E-wave deceleration time
– deceleration time indicates how
rapidly the early diastolic phase of filling proceeds. This is the phase,
remember, in which filling is dependent on a pressure gradient from a left
atrium that is full of blood to a left ventricule that has just ejected its
blood and is mostly empty. Deceleration times increase as left ventricular
relaxation decreases; if the left ventricule is not distended as much as usual
then the pressure gradient between it and the left atrium decreases and it will
take longer to fill.
Isovolumic Relaxation time (IVRT,
IRT) –
IRT measures the time from the
closing of the aortic valve – which halts blood flows out of the heart (systole) – to
the time the mitral valve opens and blood begins to refill the left ventricle.
Essentially it measures the time during which the ventricle relaxes just before
it starts to receives blood again. Hearts with
diastolic dysfunction usually take longer to fully relax. Healthy hearts usually
take about 70 +/- 12 ms (microseconds?) while hearts with diastolic dysfunction
usually take about 110 ms to fully relax.
Atrial Flow Reversal
– Even in healthy people the
force of the atrial contraction during the last phase of diastole often causes
some blood to back up into the pulmonary veins. This pulse of blood can be picked up on an
echocardiogram and is called an Ar wave. As left ventricular pressure builds up
in heart failure due to increased stiffness of the heart muscle more and more blood is forced into the
pulmonary veins and the amplitude and the duration of the Ar wave increases.
Diastolic dysfunction is indicated when the amplitude of the A-wave is over 25
cms. and its duration lasts longer than that of the A wave.
Based on the information given above a
generalized chart can be developed (Koren 2002, Galderisi 2005,
Pollard and Pozzoli 2001).
|
Degree of dystolic dysfuncton |
E/A |
IVRT |
E wave deceleration |
Atrial reversal |
Ar vs. A wave |
|
None - normal |
>1 |
*70 +/- 12 |
200 |
<25 |
smaller |
|
Mild |
<1 |
>100 |
>240 |
<.35 |
smaller |
|
Mild to moderate |
<1 |
>100 |
>240 |
>.35 |
20 ms > |
|
Moderate |
(Pseudo)normal 1-2 |
>100 |
? |
>.35 |
25 ms >s |
|
Severe (restrictive) |
>1.5 |
>60 |
<150ms |
>.25 |
? |
*> 40 years of age = 80 +/- 12
Structural changes
–
As the load on the heart cells increases
during diastolic heart failure they begin to shift position and enlarge causing
left ventricular hypertrophy and/or stiffness. Increased collagen deposition and
fibrous tissue production due to activation of the renin-aldosterone-angiotensin
system further stiffens the ventricule. Left ventricular hypertrophy or
enlargement is is well correlated with increased left ventricular pressure (LVEDP) and
is, therefore, a good indicator of serious
diastolic dysfunction (Zile et. al. 2001). Left ventricular enlargement is much common in diastolic than
in systolic heart failure (Shamsham and Mitchell 2000). It Another commonly found structural abnormality is left atrial dilation
(Shamsham and Mitchell 2000, Torosoff and Philbin 2003). Left atrial dilation occurs when
a stiff left ventricule forces blood to back up into the left
atrium. Chest x-rays can also distinguish a third abnormality
of significant diastolic dysfunction called pulmonary congestion. This is all
very complicated but the upshot is that structural changes occurring in
diastolic dysfunction often cause heart enlargement or hypertrophy, and
these can be readily found.
Controversy
- Although it appears that most physicians and reference sources
accept the reliability of non-structural measures of diastolic dysfunction two
recent papers with contrasting positions indicate a real disparity exists in how
valuable researchers believe these tests are.
Interestingly, both papers suggest these tests are unnecessary; one because the
authors assert a
more accurate test is available and one that asserts tests of systolic
functioning are all that is needed to diagnose diastolic dysfunction.
Traditional
measures of diastolic dysfunction are unreliable?
A key process in mapping out the cause of any
disease is correlating symptom exacerbation with measures of dysfunction. If
lactic acid buildup, for instance, contributes to muscle fatigue then as the muscles get more and more fatigued
lactic acid levels should rise. Since exercise
intolerance is one of the cardinal symptoms of heart failure one study examined indices of diastolic dysfunction
to determine if they were correlated with measures of exercise intolerance (Skaluba and Litwin 2004)
The authors noted how inconsistently measures of
mitral valve flow (E/A) or pulmonary vein flow (atrial flow reversal) have
correlated in past studies with left ventricular filling pressure - the gold standard for
diastolic dysfunction. Remember that diastolic dysfunction is synonymous with
stiffness of the left ventricle. If it is unable to relax enough to allow
filling the heart will use enormous pressure to fill it up - thus left
ventricular filling pressure is indicative of diastolic dysfunction. The
results are even poorer when individuals with intact systolic functioning (i.e.
those with putative diastolic dysfunction such as CFS patients) are included.
This suggests that E/A and atrial flow reversal tests are relatively
poor indicators of diastolic function.
The problem with the E measure is its sensitivity to both changes in preload and afterload
means it may reflect changes
in those conditions rather than in reduced left ventricular relaxation or increased
stiffness. Preload is the amount of tension in the ventricular wall just
prior to when it contracts and propels blood into the aorta. Simply put it is a
function of anything (blood volume, pressure) that effects filling (high BV, BP = high
preload, . Afterload is the force in the arteries the heart must push against in
order to expel its
blood. Afterload is effected by peripheral arterial resistance, (high
vasoconstriction = high afterload), viscosity of the blood (high viscosity=high
afterload), etc. Thus conditions which cause increased preload, such as high
blood pressure or reduced preload such as low blood volume (which many CFS
patients have) may skew the results
of these tests.
This study found that traditional indices of
mitral valve inflows such as the E/A ratio, E-deceleration time and
isovolumetric relaxation time were not significantly correlated with exercise
capacity (Skaluba and Litwin 2004). (Isovolumetric relaxation time was almost
(p<.069) significantly correlated with exercise capacity). That left
ventricular mass correlated well with exercise capacity suggested left
ventricular hypertrophy is a good indicator of serious diastolic dysfunction.
The measure which was best correlated with
exercise capacity, however, was called E/Ea. E/Ea is the velocity of blood flows
past the mitral valve divided by the early diastolic velocity of the mitral
valve annulus. As Ea is less affected by preload than E/A it
appears to be a more effective measure of left ventricular relaxation rates.
E/Ea has been shown to be well correlated with both left ventricular diastolic
pressure and with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). PCWP is the
pressure found in the pulmonary arteries during diastole. As pressure builds up
in the left ventricule it begins to cut off the circulation to the lungs,
causing difficulty in breathing. It is increased LVEDP not reduced diastolic
relaxation which produces the symptoms of heart failure.
Tests of diastolic dysfunction
are unnecessary?
- On the other side of the spectrum some researchers have posited
that diagnosing diastolic heart failure does not require tests of diastolic
dysfunction but can be done through exclusion; i.e. diastolic heart failure
occurs when heart failure can be reliably diagnosed based on symptoms and no
systolic dysfunction (reduced ejection fraction) can be found. A recent study
found that while great variability was found in the prevalence of almost every
test of diastolic dysfunction, almost every patient with at least mild
hypertrophy and heart failure exhibited abnormal diastolic
function in at least one of the tests (Zile et. al. 2001). Only increased LVEDP was almost
universally found in all patients. Almost all the indices occurred in from
40-60% of all the patients. The authors concluded that given a reliable
diagnosis of heart failure based on symptom presentation and normal ejection
fraction (no systolic dysfunction), diastolic dysfunction can be assumed and
there is no need for further testing (Zile et. al. 2001). This is, however, a
controversial position as only one indice of abnormal diastolic dysfunction was
needed to assume DHF was present and no control study group was used. Note also
that having at least mild hypertrophy was a pre-condition for being included in
the study.
Prevalence and
Significance of Mild Diastolic
Dysfunction-
Since the symptoms CFS patients display do
not always correlate well with those found in heart failure an important question may be
how significant findings of diastolic dysfunction, in particular,
diastolic relaxation, are in other people with objective evidence of
diastolic dysfunction but without strong symptomatic evidence of it. Several
studies that have examined the prevalence of diastolic dysfunction in the middle
aged and more elderly population have found that it is is not at all uncommon. Using echocardiography a large study in Minnesota found that 21%, 7% and 1%
of middle-aged and older adults had mild (impaired relaxation only), moderate (pseudonormal
filling) and severe diastolic dysfunction (restrictive) respectively (Redfield
et. al. 2003). Most of those found to have moderate to severe diastolic
functioning had not been diagnosed with heart failure.
Were the largely asymptomatic people with mild
or moderate diastolic dysfunction at risk? A large study, the Strong Heart
Study, found that after confounding factors such as age, sex, cholesterol, blood
pressure, diabetes, etc. were taken into account, that E/A ratio's less than 0.6
(= impaired relaxation, mild diastolic dysfunction) were not associated with
increased mortality in an older population. High E/A ratio's (>1.5),
however, were associated with an increased risk of mortality (Bella et. al.
2002). Another five year
follow up study found mild disastolic dysfunction conferred a significantly
increased risk of mortality (Redfield et. al. 2003). This study, however,
accounted for many fewer confounding factors that the Strong Heart Study. These
studies suggest findings of restrictive filling may place someone with few
symptoms of heart failure at risk.
CFS patients should bear in mind the
sample groups in these studies were much older than the typical CFS patient and
that if heart failure is common in CFS it appears, in contrast to most people
with heart failure, to be largely non-progressive.
Summary
-
Given these contrasting position it is no
wonder that the Hurst Manual of The Heart, a standard cardiac reference text,
states ‘there is no agreement as to what constitutes abnormal diastolic
dysfunction" and that the ‘recognition, evaluation and treatment of diastolic
heart failure remains an obvious challenge’ (Francis et. al. 2000).
What can a patient take away from this maze of
sometimes conflicting information? One’s own physician must, of course, be the
guide in interpreting the tests regarding this complex matter. This review left
me - a layman
– with the following conclusions: Since
findings of mild diastolic dysfunction (impaired relaxation) are not well
correlated with the gold standard of diastolic functioning, LVEDP , or aerobic capacity, their significance regarding heart
failure is unclear. Since it is not
uncommon for healthy people to have low E/A ratio’s, and atrial flow reversal,
these measures, in particular, should be treated with caution. On the
other hand findings that indicate restrictive filling is occurring appear to be
significant.
The E/Ea flow test appears
to be a more solid indicator of diastolic heart failure than the E/A ratio. Similarly, structural
abnormalities such as left ventricular hypertrophy and left atrial dilation are signs of significant
diastolic dysfunction as are indications of pulmonary congestion on
a chest x-ray.
While there are questions regarding the efficacy of several measures of diastolic dysfunction it must be noted that most authors and
reference sources appear
comfortable in recommending these tests to verify diastolic heart failure when
symptoms of heart failure are present and tests of ejection fraction are normal.
What test abnormalities mean in the absence of such symptoms is entirely unclear
to me. One study found mild diastolic dysfunction was not uncommon in the people
without symptoms of heart failure (about 20%).
CFS patients appear to inhabit a kind
of in-between ground with regard to heart failure symptoms. Every patient is
different, of course, but CFS patients as a group (a) do not appear to exhibit the
symptoms of heart failure to the same degree as heart failure patients (i.e.
shortened breath, edema are not hallmarks of CFS), (b) they do not commonly
exhibit many of the symptoms of heart failure (edema, rales, particular heart
sounds, upper right abdominal quadrant soreness, nausea, coughing, wheezing), and (c) they exhibit many
symptoms that are not common to heart failure patients (increased allergies,
chemical sensitivities, lymph node swelling, muscle pain, sore throat, impaired
cognition,etc.). With regard to symptoms they present an atypical form of heart
failure.
Both Peckerman and Lerner have
suggested CFS patients may have a ’subtle’ form of heart failure that has slipped below
the physicians and
researchers radar screen. Even though it is ‘subtle’ they suggest it still may
have disabling consequences.
It appears clear that if heart failure commonly
exists in CFS it does not (a) follow the traditional course of heart failure,
(b) that it is accompanied by a set of dysfunctions unique to CFS patients, and
that (c) some of the most common compensatory mechanisms triggered by heart
failure are not found in CFS (RAA activation, increased blood volume, increased
uric acid levels).
While this paper has been about diastolic
dysfunction it is still far from clear that tests of systolic functioning; that
is, ejection fraction, are normal in CFS patients. In his 2005 presentation Dr.
Cheney reportedly states systolic dysfunction is not commonly found in CFS. A
study by Peckerman to be published sometime in 2005 is expected, however, to
indicate that ejection fraction is
dramatically reduced in some CFS patients. This could indicate both diastolic and systolic
dysfunction is present in at least some CFS patients.
There is clearly still
much to learn about the heart and CFS. Hopefully the funding will be
available for researchers to pursue this new arena of interest.
Treatment
- Several classes of drugs are
commonly used to treat diastolic dysfunction.
Angiotensin
converting enzyme inhibitors
(ACEI’s – enalapril, lisinopril) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB’s
– candesartan, losartan) are among the most common pharmaceuticals used in
treating diastolic dysfunction. ACEI’s can decrease left ventricular hypertrophy
and increase left ventricular relaxation. ARB’s reduce hypertension and improve
exercise intolerance and quality of life.
Beta blockers
(atenolol, metoprolol) – are the other main treatment for diastolic dysfunction.
By slowing the heart rate BB’s cause increased left ventricular filling time.
They also improve hypertension, reduce left ventricular hypertrophy and inhibit
renin release
Calcium channel blockers
– can reduce left ventricular hypertrophy and improve stage one
filling and exercise capacity.
Diuretics
– are commonly used to reduce total blood volume, which is often raised in heart
failure. Reducing blood volume reduces diastolic pressure. In an attempt to
compensate for increased diastolic pressure heart cells increase in size. Over
time this leads to increased ventricular stiffness and the inability to
accommodate normal flows of blood. The problem with diuretics is that, not
surprisingly, given their reduction in blood volume, they often result in
reduced cardiac output, which is already decreased in some patients with
diastolic dysfunction. A subset of CFS patients have reduced not increased blood
volume.
Exercise
– is effective in reducing the symptoms of diastolic heart failure (Haney et.
al. 2005). The Hurst Manual states "Importantly, exercise intolerance can improve with training, which
should be encouraged in patients with classes I-III (of IV) heart failure
symptoms" (Francis et. al. 2000).
(Please send any comments, suggestions etc. to
Phoenixcfs@yahoo.com)
Go to
Cardiovascular Issues in CFS Part I: the Studies
:Go to
Cardiovascular Issues in CFS Part II: the Cheney Theory
________________________________
Bella, J., Palmieri, V., Roman, M.,
Liu, J., Welty, T., Lee, E., Fabsitz, R., Howard, B. and R. Devereux. 2002.
Mitral valve ratio of early to late diastolic filling velocity as a predictor of
mortality in middle-aged and elderly adults: the Strong Heart Study. Circulation
105, 1928-1933.
DeBececker, P. Dendale, P., De Meirleir,
K., Campine, I., Vandenborne, K. and Y. Hagers. 1998. Autonsomic testing in
patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. American Journal of Medicine 105:
22S-26S/
Francis, G., Gassler, J., Sonnenblick, E.
Pathophysiology and diagnosis of heart failure.2001. In Hurst’s The Heart, 10th
e.d., 655-679. Ed. Fuster, V., Alexander, R. and R. Rourke. McGraw-Hill, New
York
Koren, M.J. Diastolic Congestive Heart Failure.
Medical Director, Non-Invasive Cardiology, Memorial Hospital, Jacksonville,
Florida.
Haney, S., Sur, D. and Z. Xu. 2005. Diastolic
heart failure: a review and primary care perspective. Journal of American Board
of Family Practices 18: 189-98.
Mosterd, A., Hoes, A., de Bruyne, M.,
Deckers, J., Linkert, D., Hofman, A. and D. Grobbee. 1999. Prevalence of heart
failure and left ventricular dysfunction in the general population. The
Rotterdam Study. European Heart Journal 20, 447-455.
Otto, M., Balohlavek, M., Khandheria,
B., Gilman, G., Svartikova, A. and V. Somers. 2004. Comparison of right and left
ventricular function in obese and nonobese men. American Journal of Cardiology
93: 1569-1572.
Redfield, M., Jacobsen, S., Burnett,
J., Mahoney, D., Bailey, K. and R. Rodeheffer. 2003. Burden of systolic and
diastolic ventricular dysfunction in the community. JAMA 289, 194-202.
Roelandt, J. and M. Pozzoli. Non-invasive
assessment of left ventricular diastolic function and filling pressure.
Skaluba, S. and A. Irwin. 2004. Mechanisms of
exercise intolerance. Circulation 109: 972-977.
Torosoff, M. and Philbin, E. 2003. Improving
outcomes in diastolic heart failure. Postgraduate Medicine 113: 51-58.
Zile, M., Gaasch, W., Carroll, J., Feldman, M.,
Aurigemma, G., Schaer, G., Ghali, J. and P. Liebson. 2001. Heart failure with a
normal ejection fraction. Is measurement of diastolic function necessary to make
the diagnosis of diastolic heart failure? Circulation 104: 779-782.