Original Article
Journal of Human Hypertension (2004) 18, 397–402. doi:10.1038/sj.jhh.1001709 Published online 8 April 2004
Association of left bundle branch block with left ventricular structure and function in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: the LIFE study
This study was supported by Grant COZ 368 from Merck & Co., Inc., West Point, PA, USA. Drs. Devereux and Dahlöf receive occasional honoraria from Merck.
Z B Li1, K Wachtell2, P M Okin1, E Gerdts3, J E Liu1, M S Nieminen4, S Jern5, B Dahlöf5 and R B Devereux1
- 1Department of Medicine, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
- 2Department of Medicine, Glostrup University Hospital, Glostrup, Denmark
- 3Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
- 4Department of Cardiology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
- 5Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Östra, Gothenburg, Sweden
Correspondence: Dr RB Devereux, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Division of Cardiology, Box 222, 525 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021, USA. E-mail: rbdevere@med.cornell.edu
Abstract
Electrocardiographic (ECG) left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), but its relation to left ventricular (LV) geometry and function in hypertensive patients with ECG LVH is unknown. Echocardiograms were performed in 933 patients (548 women, mean age 66
7 years) with essential hypertension and LVH by baseline ECG in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study. LBBB, defined by Minnesota code 7.1, was present in 47 patients and absent in 886 patients. Patients with and without LBBB were similar in age, gender, body mass index, blood pressure, prevalence of diabetes, and history of myocardial infarction. Despite similarly elevated mean LV mass (126
25 vs 124
26 g/m2) and relative wall thickness (0.41
0.07 vs 0.41
0.07, P=NS), patients with LBBB had lower LV fractional shortening (30
6 vs 34
6%), ejection fraction (56
10 vs 61
8%), midwall shortening (14
2 vs 16
2%), stress-corrected midwall shortening (90
13 vs 97
13%) (all P<0.001), and lower LV stroke index (38
7 vs 42
9 ml/m2) (P<0.05). Patients with LBBB also had reduced LV inferior wall and lower mitral E/A ratio (0.75
0.18 vs 0.87
0.38) (all P<0.05). The above univariate results were confirmed by multivariate analyses adjusted for gender, age, blood pressures, height, weight, body mass index, heart rate, and LV mass index. Among hypertensive patients at high risk because of ECG LVH, the presence of LBBB identifies individuals with worse global and regional LV systolic function and impaired LV relaxation without more severe LVH by echocardiography.
Keywords:
echocardiography, electrocardiogram, hypertrophy, left bundle branch block, left ventricle
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated
REVIEWS
The prognostic value of the ECG in hypertension: where are we now?
Journal of Human Hypertension Review
RESEARCH
Journal of Human Hypertension Original Article
Journal of Human Hypertension Original Article
American Journal of Hypertension Original Article
Journal of Human Hypertension Original Article
