 |
 |

Lidocaine Infusion in Acute Myocardial InfarctionEffects on Left Ventricular Function
Shahbudin H. Rahimtoola, MB, MRCPE;
M. Ziad Sinno, MD;
Henry S. Loeb, MD;
Ruben Chuquimia, MD;
Kenneth M. Rosen, MD;
Rolf M. Gunnar, MS, MD
Arch Intern Med. 1971;128(3):416-418.
Abstract
The effects of lidocaine hydrochloride infusion (1 and 3 mg/min) on left ventricular (LV) function were assessed in 23 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). There were no significant changes in heart rate, systemic arterial pressure, central venous pressure, cardiac output, preejection period (PEP), left ventricular ejection time (LVET), the PEP/LVET ratio, or calculated systemic vascular resistance. Left ventricular pressures were obtained in six patients. There was no change in calculated LV stroke work. The LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) was unchanged in five patients, but one patient had an increase of LVEDP and of mean aortic pressure that was not associated with changes in other recorded parameters. Lidocaine hydrochloride infusion at 1 and 3 mg/min in patients with AMI does not result in a measurable alteration of cardiac performance.
Author Affiliations
Chicago
From the Department of Adult Cardiology, Division of Medicine and the Hektoen Institute for Medical Research, Cook County Hospital and the Department of Medicine, Abraham Lincoln School of Medicine, University of Illinois College of Medicine, Chicago.
Footnotes
Received for publication Nov 11, 1970; accepted Feb 10, 1971.
Reprint requests to Department of Adult Cardiology, Division of Medicine, Cook County Hospital, 1825 W Harrison St, Chicago 60612 (Dr. Rahimtoola).
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Spontaneous Changes in Hemodynamics in Uncomplicated Acute Myocardial Infarction: a Prospective Echocardiographic Study
Aronow and Prakash
ANGIOLOGY 1977;28:677-683.
ABSTRACT
Antiarrhythmic Prophylaxis in Ambulatory Patients With Coronary Heart Disease
Koch-Weser
Arch Intern Med 1972;129:763-772.
ABSTRACT
|