This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Clinical Implications

Leon D. Ostrander, Jr, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1978;138(1):25-26.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The trifascicular scheme of intraventricular conduction has gained wide clinical acceptance during the past decade.^1,2 Anatomical distribution of specialized conducting fibers in the left ventricle does not correspond well with the discrete hypothetical fascicles that are postulated in normal activation,³ but the concept of three fascicles serves as a useful functional classification of conduction disturbances. When strict diagnostic criteria are applied, electrocardiographic findings of left anterior or posterior fascicular block are reasonably specific signs of true conduction disturbances. When criteria are applied loosely or signs of confounding conditions such as inferior myocardial infarction or right ventricular hypertrophy are not taken into account, the diagnosis is suspect.

Clinical implications of fascicular block, particularly bifascicular block, have generated much controversy. In 1968, Lasser and associates⁴ reported that a high proportion of patients with complete atrioventricular heart block had right bundle-branch block (RBBB) and left anterior fascicular block on earlier . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Ann Arbor, Mich

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?