The mechanical properties of left ventricular contraction were described in terms of tension, velocity, length, and time in closed-chest, sedated dogs in which a large aorto-caval fistula had resulted in circulatory congestion, and the results were compared with those in normal dogs. Instantaneous contractile element velocity was calculated from left ventricular pressure and its first derivative during isovolumic left ventricular contractions produced by sudden balloon occlusion of the ascending aorta during diastole. A range of ventricular end-diastolic volumes was induced and heart rate was controlled at 150 beats/min. Wall tension (stress) was derived from ventricular pressure and volume, the latter being obtained from the pressure-volume relation of the passive ventricle. Extrapolated velocity at zero tension, Vmax, averaged 3.0 circ/sec in the normal dogs and 2.9 circ/sec in the seven dogs with an aorto-caval fistula and fluid retention; in only one of these seven animals was Vmax below the lower limit of normal of 2.7 circ/sec. Isovolumic tension (Po) in dogs with aorto-caval fistulas tended to be slightly greater than normal at low ventricular filling pressures, and there was no difference in Po between the two groups of animals at high ventricular filling pressures. Time to peak pressure averaged 151 ± 6 (SE) msec (normal 139 ± 3). Left ventricular weight averaged 6.32 ± 0.23 g/kg of initial body weight (normal 5.25 ± 0.56 g/kg) (P < 0.001), which reflected moderate ventricular hypertrophy, and ventricular internal volume at a given filling pressure was increased proportionally. Therefore, the ventricular contractile state usually was normal in the dog with a large aorto-caval fistula, and it is proposed that mechanisms for fluid retention that results in circulatory congestion were activated because of the large hemodynamic burden despite normal myocardial contractile properties.
Roger R. Taylor, James W. Covell, John Ross Jr.
Usage data is cumulative from May 2024 through May 2025.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 127 | 3 |
51 | 9 | |
Scanned page | 324 | 1 |
Citation downloads | 52 | 0 |
Totals | 554 | 13 |
Total Views | 567 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.