The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ventricular stroke work and efficiency both remain nearly optimal despite altered vascular loading
Abstract
Recent clinical and animal studies have suggested that ventricular-vascular coupling normally operates at either optimal ventricular efficiency (EFF = stroke work/myocardial oxygen consumption) or stroke work (SW) and that efficiency in particular is compromised by cardiac dysfunction. These distinctions between coupling states at maximal work vs. efficiency are largely based on theoretical models. To date, there are few direct experimental data defining optimal conditions for each parameter, respectively, in the same heart or tests of whether changes from these conditions must produce significant declines in both parameters. Therefore, 10 isolated blood-perfused canine hearts were studied at varying contractilities, with the heart ejecting into a simulated three-element Windkessel model of arterial impedance. For a given inotropic state [indexed by the slope of the end-systolic pressure-volume relationship (Ees)], myocardial oxygen consumption and SW were measured over a broad range of afterload resistances. The latter was indexed by the effective arterial elastance (Ea) and ventricular-vascular interaction expressed by the ratio of Ea to Ees (Ea/Ees). On average, maximal SW occurred at Ea/Ees = 0.80 +/- 0.16, whereas EFF was maximal at Ea/Ees = 0.70 +/- 0.15 (P < 0.01). However, these differences were small, and both SW and EFF were > or = 90% of their respective optima over a broad overlapping range of Ea-to-Ees ratios (0.3-1.3, corresponds with ejection fractions ranging from approximately 40 to 80%). These data show that both SW and efficiency are nearly maximal under many conditions of ventricular-vascular interaction.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Marwick, T. H., Gillebert, T. C., Aurigemma, G., Chirinos, J., Derumeaux, G., Galderisi, M., Gottdiener, J., Haluska, B., Ofili, E., Segers, P., et al. (2015) · Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography · doi:10.1016/j.echo.2015.05.002 · Cited by 583
Invasive left ventricle pressure–volume analysis: overview and practical clinical implications
Bastos, M. B., Burkhoff, D., Maly, J., Daemen, J., den Uil, C. A., Ameloot, K., Lenzen, M., Mahfoud, F., Zijlstra, F., Schreuder, J. J., et al. (2020) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz552 · Cited by 237
Self-citationAguilar, D., Deswal, A., Ramasubbu, K., Mann, D. L., & Bozkurt, B. (2010) · The American Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.09.041 · Cited by 96
Cardiac Mechanoenergetics in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction
Hieda, M., & Goto, Y. (2020) · Heart Failure Clinics · doi:10.1016/j.hfc.2020.02.002 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- De Tombe, P. P., Jones, S., Burkhoff, D., Hunter, W. C., & Kass, D. A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 1993-06-01
- Volume
- 264
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- H1817-H1824
- ISSN
- 0363-6135 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1539
- OpenAlex
- W2408959566
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ventricular stroke work and efficiency both remain nearly optimal despite altered vascular loading. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/ajpheart.1993.264.6.h1817
- The paper
- De Tombe, P. P., Jones, S., Burkhoff, D., Hunter, W. C., & Kass, D. A. (1993). Ventricular stroke work and efficiency both remain nearly optimal despite altered vascular loading. American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.1993.264.6.h1817
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.