Zhongyin Zhou,1,* Feiyan Ma,2,* Jianxiang Zhu,1 Jialing Wang,1 Jing Zhang,3 Dongsheng Zhao4 

1Department of Echocardiography, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, First People’s Hospital of Nantong City, Nantong, 226000, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Ultrasound, the People’s Hospital of Rugao, Nantong, 226000, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Electroencephalogram, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, First People’s Hospital of Nantong City, Nantong, 226000, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, First People’s Hospital of Nantong City, Nantong, 226000, People’s Republic of China

*These authors contributed equally to this work

Correspondence: Dongsheng Zhao, Department of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, First People’s Hospital of Nantong City, No. 666 Shengli Road, Nantong, 226006, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 13814710785, Email dongshengzhaoss@126.com

Objective: Left ventricular (LV) mechanical dyssynchrony (LVMD) is fundamental to the progression of heart failure and ventricular remodeling. The status of LVMD in different patterns of bundle branch blocks (BBB) is unclear. In this study, we analyzed the relationship between LVMD and left ventricular systolic dysfunction using real-time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT-3DE).
Methods: RT-3DE and conventional two-dimensional echocardiography were performed on 68 patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB group), 106 patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB group), and 103 patients without BBB (Normal group). The RT-3DE data sets provided time-volume analysis for global and segmental LV volumes. The LV systolic dyssynchrony index (LVSDI) was calculated using the standard deviation (SD) and maximal difference (Dif) of time to minimum segmental volume (tmsv) for LV segments adjusted by the R-R interval. LVMD was considered if the LVSDI (Tmsv-16-SD) was greater than or equal to 5%.
Results: LVSDI is negatively and significantly correlated with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), but not with BBB or QRS duration. The proportion of LVMD in the LBBB, RBBB, and Normal group was 30.88%, 28.30%, and 25.24%, respectively, and there was no significant difference.
Conclusion: In dilated cardiomyopathy, LVMD is more closely related to LVEF reduction than QRS morphology and duration.

Keywords: bundle branch block, dilated cardiomyopathy, mechanical dyssynchrony