ライフサイエンスコーパス: bundle branch block

1 chemic pattern (ST-segment elevation or left bundle branch block).

2 -segment elevation or depression and/or left bundle-branch block).

3 duction system abnormalities, including left bundle branch block.

4 e branch block is far more common than right bundle branch block.

5 tivity and specificity in patients with left bundle branch block.

6 cal septal myectomy, 47 (40%) developed left bundle branch block.

7 ol septal ablation, 21 (36%) developed right bundle branch block.

8 60 patients with mild heart failure and left bundle branch block.

9 spected AMI and ST segment elevation or left bundle branch block.

10 h of symptom onset with ST elevation or left bundle branch block.

11 egree atrioventricular block with associated bundle branch block.

12 ose with QRS width 120 to 149 ms or non-left bundle branch block.

13 (1.6%) had left (n = 131) or right (n = 289) bundle branch block.

14 igraphy is decreased in patients with a left bundle branch block.

15 d pharmacologic stress in patients with left bundle branch block.

16 nts with heart failure (HF) and without left bundle branch block.

17 dent predictors of new onset persistent left bundle branch block.

18 LVP and BiVP in the failing heart with left bundle branch block.

19 ith or without systolic dysfunction and left bundle-branch block.

20 patients with systolic dysfunction and left bundle-branch block.

21 ventricular ejection fraction <35% and left bundle-branch block.

22 frequently accompanied by an apparent right bundle-branch block.

23 had chronic coronary artery disease and left bundle-branch block.

24 arction in patients with chest pain and left bundle-branch block.

25 r mortality rate than either transient or no bundle-branch block.

26 of acute infarction in the presence of left bundle-branch block.

27 ts presenting with acute chest pain and left bundle-branch block.

28 t) with acute myocardial infarction had left bundle-branch block.

29 ll mortality rate associated with persistent bundle-branch block.

30 ng could differentiate between BrS and right bundle-branch block.

31 morphology into those with and without left bundle-branch block.

32 lockade, and the presence of a complete left bundle-branch block.

33 lts: (1) ST elevation or presumably new left bundle branch block, (2) other ECG signs indicating myoc

34 1.44) versus 1.04 (0.78, 1.51), de novo left bundle-branch block (4% versus 0%) and Q waves (5.3% ver

35 lows: right bundle-branch block, 65.2%; left bundle-branch block, 43.75%; normal QRS, 27.6%.

36 ing ECG abnormalities were as follows: right bundle-branch block, 65.2%; left bundle-branch block, 43

37 icular conduction delay, or incomplete right bundle branch block, a much higher proportion than in th

38 pacing/stimulation in DCM patients with left bundle-branch block acutely enhances systolic function w

39 possibly with harm in patients without left bundle-branch block (adjusted hazard ratio for death fro

40 h intraventricular conduction delay, such as bundle branch block after cardiac surgery.

41 y 17 patients (2.0%) had new Q waves or left bundle-branch block after surgery; however, cTnT elevati

42 New-onset persistent left bundle-branch block after TAVR occurred in 37 patients,

43 Bundle branch block also carried an independent 53% high

44 Twelve-lead ECGs during left bundle branch block and cardiac resynchronization therap

45 with Lugol's solution induced complete right bundle branch block and converted the bidirectional VT i

46 ion study identified a link between ETV1 and bundle branch block and heart block in humans.

47 hic VT (n = 23) or PVCs (n = 47) with a left bundle branch block and inferior QRS axis morphology.

48 rietal band VAs were characterized by a left bundle branch block and left inferior (n=12) or superior

49 to have nonischemic cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch block and less likely to have renal dysfun

50 failure with QRS duration >/=150 ms and left bundle branch block and less predictable in those with Q

51 Left bundle branch block and RBBB induced similar QRS widenin

52 Right bundle branch block and right ventricular (RV) dysfuncti

53 cular ventricular tachycardia, and the right bundle branch block and ST segment elevation syndrome of

54 n association with typical or atypical right bundle branch block and ST-segment elevations (Brugada s

55 in; ventricular tachycardias (VTs) with left bundle branch block and V(3) transition remain a challen

56 Patients with new-onset persistent left bundle-branch block and a QRS duration >160 ms had a gre

57 cluded Coronary Arteries) trial who had left bundle-branch block and acute myocardial infarction conf

58 nduction disturbances, mainly new-onset left bundle-branch block and advanced atrioventricular block

59 In left bundle-branch block and AV-block hearts, optimal hemodyn

60 justment for other significant factors, left bundle-branch block and intraventricular conduction dela

61 ctors that impair the detection of ischemia (bundle-branch block and paced rhythms)-in predicting out

62 Right bundle-branch block and precordial injury pattern in V1

63 icular fibrillation characterized by a right bundle-branch block and ST elevation in the right precor

64 wo groups: group 1 (n=16) patients had right bundle-branch block and ST-segment elevation in V1 throu

65 New-onset left bundle-branch block and the need for permanent pacemaker

66 er implantation after TAVR, with prior right bundle-branch block and transcatheter valve type and imp

67 ts reviewed presenting ECGs to identify left bundle-branch block and, in the absence of left bundle-b

68 93% had ST-segment elevation or bundle branch block, and 7% had ST-segment depression.

69 od pressure <100 mm Hg, anterior MI, or left bundle branch block, and as "low clinical risk" if none

70 rate, and with prevalent hypertension, right bundle branch block, and cardiovascular disease.

71 smoking, left ventricular hypertrophy, left bundle branch block, and diabetes mellitus; it had good

72 ents with left bundle branch block, non-left bundle branch block, and right bundle branch block morph

73 isease), normal QT intervals, apparent right bundle branch block, and sudden cardiac death, particula

74 le-branch block (LBBB), 228 (13%) with right bundle-branch block, and 308 (17%) with nonspecific intr

75 ent smoking, body mass index >35 kg/m2, left bundle-branch block, and left ventricular hypertrophy.

76 ude various RSR' patterns, without a typical bundle-branch block are markers of altered ventricular d

77 us persistent ST-segment elevation and right bundle branch block, as well as the effectiveness of sod

78 Bundle branch block at hospital admission in patients wi

79 ricular (AV) block, bifascicular block, left bundle branch block, atrial fibrillation, and left ventr

80 Patients (n = 44) with bundle branch blocks, atrial flutter or fibrillation, pa

81 No interaction with therapy arm and bundle branch block (BBB) status was found.

82 Left bundle-branch block (BBB) is considered an important pre

83 versus 85 to 99 ms and >/=100 ms (excluding bundle branch block [BBB]) and QRS morphology in those w

84 incident heart failure (HF) associated with bundle-branch blocks (BBBs) in postmenopausal women.

85 ing permanent pacing, three of whom had left bundle branch block before the procedure.

86 patients, 8.1% of whom had intermittent left bundle-branch block before the procedure.

87 We examined the occurrence of new-onset bundle-branch block, both transient and persistent, in 6

88 io-ventricular conduction block (AVB), right bundle branch block, bradycardia, and the Brugada syndro

89 as applied in the presence of complete right bundle branch block by atrial-synchronized RV free wall

90 he right bundle branch correlated with right-bundle-branch block by ECG.

91 es were significant among patients with left bundle branch block conduction disturbance (n = 1,204, p

92 y in those with QRS >/= 150 ms and with left bundle branch block conduction disturbance, respectively

93 ctural heart disease associated with a right bundle branch block conduction pattern and ST-segment el

94 In patients with mild heart failure and left bundle branch block, decreased RWT was associated with a

95 dle-branch block and, in the absence of left bundle-branch block, definite STEMI (according to both c

96 After the procedure, left bundle branch block developed in 46% of septal myectomy

97 vival benefit of CRT-D in patients with left bundle-branch block did not differ significantly accordi

98 One patient developed complete right bundle branch block during radiofrequency catheter ablat

99 structural heart disease, paced rhythms, and bundle branch block during sinus rhythm were excluded.

100 toms, left ventricular dysfunction, and left bundle-branch block, early intervention with CRT-D was a

101 Ten DCM patients with left bundle-branch block (ejection fraction 20+/-3%, QRS dura

102 North American population with acute MI and bundle branch block enrolled in the Global Utilization o

103 nsustained ventricular tachycardia with left bundle branch block excluding right ventricular outflow

104 and 24 patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block followed by computer simulations of

105 55; p = 0.033) and new-onset persistent left bundle-branch block following TAVR (HR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.

106 ological substrate and 6 patients with right bundle-branch block for comparison.

107 nontetralogy control subjects (20 with right bundle-branch block [group 4] and 20 with normal ECG pat

108 left ventricular ejection fraction and left bundle-branch block; group 3 (n=20), left ventricular ej

109 We identified 12 affected individuals (right bundle-branch block, > or =1-mm STE) with an autosomal d

110 Unlike BrS, right bundle-branch block had delayed activation in the entire

111 Patients with bundle-branch block had lower ejection fractions, higher

112 yridamole or adenosine in patients with left bundle-branch block has not been established.

113 Studies of patients with acute MI and bundle branch block have reported high mortality rates a

114 In left bundle-branch block hearts, CRTopt occurred at A-LV inte

115 HFEs was pronounced among patients with left bundle branch block (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.49, p <

116 was neutral, regardless of morphology, right bundle branch block (HR=1.01, P=0.975), and intraventric

117 ST elevation/left bundle branch block identified patients with reduced Thr

118 (ii) heart with a conduction disorder (right bundle branch block) (iii) focal activation initiated by

119 n resulted in ST-segment elevation and right bundle branch block in all patients in group A and in al

120 ts with acute myocardial infarction (MI) and bundle branch block in the thrombolytic era.

121 lar tachycardia in 26, and intermittent left bundle-branch block in 3 patients.

122 Left bundle-branch block incidence was 13% at baseline and 61

123 Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias of left bundle branch block inferior axis morphology are usually

124 hic pattern associated with this VT was left bundle branch block, inferior axis and early precordial

125 Normal heart VT with left bundle branch block, inferior axis and early precordial

126 Twelve patients with normal heart left bundle branch block, inferior axis VT and previously fai

127 T-VT and ARVD/C-VT patients can share a left bundle branch block/inferior axis morphology.

128 premature ventricular contractions with left bundle branch block/inferior axis pattern in 16 ARVD/C p

129 ch block/inferior axis, case 3 showed a left bundle branch block/inferior axis, and case 4 showed a n

130 h block/superior axis, case 2 showed a right bundle branch block/inferior axis, case 3 showed a left

131 a and a wide complex tachycardia with a left bundle branch block/inferior axis.

132 t bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch block, intraventricular conduction delay)

133 We hypothesized that right bundle branch block is associated with specific RV mecha

134 Left bundle branch block is far more common than right bundle

135 alters the incidence and clinical outcome of bundle-branch block is unclear.

136 pa 0.52), and Q waves (kappa 0.44), good for bundle branch block (kappa 0.78), and very good for atri

137 atrial arrhythmias (kappa 0.84 and 0.79) and bundle branch block (kappa 0.88 and 0.79).

138 upraventricular complexes with left or right bundle-branch block (L/RBBB) was investigated in a canin

139 a pronounced effect among patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.58; p <

140 82], p = 0.001) and CRT-D patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (HR: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.35 to 0.

141 evolution in ST segment, T or Q wave or left bundle branch block (LBBB) abnormalities between the pre

142 ronization Therapy) study patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and 0, 1, 2, or >/=3 comorbid

143 ific syndrome characterized by isolated left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a history of progressive

144 t to separate the effects of associated left bundle branch block (LBBB) and coronary artery disease (

145 de (VAQRS), halfway between that during left bundle branch block (LBBB) and LV pacing, reflects optim

146 ata on the clinical impact of new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) and permanent pacemaker impla

147 t guidelines suggest that patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) be treated with cardiac resyn

148 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) causes left ventricular (LV)

149 and death events in CRT-D patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) enrolled in MADIT-CRT (Multic

150 isolated T wave inversion in 21.9% and left bundle branch block (LBBB) in 9.0%.

151 rognostic value of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (LBBB) in patients undergoing transc

152 Patients without left bundle branch block (LBBB) or patients with smaller QRS

153 BB) patients have larger scar size than left bundle branch block (LBBB) patients do.

154 a suspected acute coronary syndrome and left bundle branch block (LBBB) present a unique diagnostic a

155 no benefit of CRT-D in patients without left bundle branch block (LBBB) regardless of patient sex.

156 Studies in canine hearts with acute left bundle branch block (LBBB) showed that endocardial left

157 nts with CRT-D in a very wide QRSD with left bundle branch block (LBBB) versus those without LBBB.

158 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) was present in 65 patients, r

159 ead electrocardiographic morphology was left bundle branch block (LBBB), and in 15, it was nonspecifi

160 hy (DCM); in particular, the effects of left bundle branch block (LBBB), coronary artery disease (CAD

161 In contrast to patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), heart failure patients with

162 Among patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), women had a 21% lower mortal

163 synchronization therapy candidates with left bundle branch block (LBBB)-like electrocardiogram morpho

164 ronary artery disease and patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB).

165 hearts with a pure right (RBBB) versus left bundle branch block (LBBB).

166 in mildly symptomatic HF patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB).

167 Therapy (MADIT-CRT), patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch

168 strated an adverse impact of persistent left bundle-branch block (LBBB) after surgical aortic valve r

169 Of these, 1175 had left bundle-branch block (LBBB) and 308 had non-LBBB.

170 ree wall differed between patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) and normal QRSd and if synchr

171 go exercise testing develop a transient left bundle-branch block (LBBB) during exercise, but its prog

172 tricular outflow tract arrhythmias with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) morphology.

173 trials were greater among patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) or longer QRS duration.

174 d to investigate the cardiac effects of left bundle-branch block (LBBB) using myocardial contrast ech

175 at baseline, there were 1281 (70%) with left bundle-branch block (LBBB), 228 (13%) with right bundle-

176 ardial infarction (MI) in patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB), but the clinical impact of t

177 ough 30% to 50% of patients develop new left bundle-branch block (LBBB), its effect on clinical outco

178 similarly augment systolic function in left bundle-branch block (LBBB)-failing hearts despite differ

179 ts with (1) RV dilatation, (2) multiple left bundle-branch block (LBBB)-type VTs, and (3) an abnormal

180 milliseconds, and 60.5% of subjects had left bundle-branch block (LBBB).

181 s subjective and further complicated by left bundle-branch block (LBBB).

182 yocardial infarction (MI) patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB).

183 rformed in anesthetized dogs with acute left bundle-branch block (LBBB, n=10) and chronic LBBB with t

184 5+/-12; ejection fraction 26+/-7%) with left bundle-branch block (LBBB; QRS duration 174+/-18 ms) wer

185 tment group, age, gender, QRS duration, left bundle-branch block, left ventricular ejection fraction,

186 the 9 patients; 9 of the 11 VTs had a right bundle branch block/left-axis morphology that mimicked l

187 diothoracic ratio, higher prevalence of left bundle branch block, lower prevalence of atrial fibrilla

188 tricular arrhythmias with a predominant left bundle branch block morphology and no ECG or echocardiog

189 hallenging because they present with a right bundle branch block morphology by electrocardiography.

190 rall, patients with mild HF but without left bundle branch block morphology did not derive clinical b

191 ricular arrhythmias with a predominant right bundle branch block morphology, 13 of 27 (48%) showed EC

192 ock, non-left bundle branch block, and right bundle branch block morphology.

193 arrhythmias arising intramurally had a left bundle-branch block morphology with inferior axis.

194 scale), but not among patients without left bundle branch block (n = 494).

195 hic ventricular arrhythmias (n=6), and right bundle-branch block (n=5).

196 CRT was performed in dogs with chronic left bundle-branch block (n=8) or atrioventricular (AV) block

197 clinical response between patients with left bundle branch block, non-left bundle branch block, and r

198 or more in at least 2 contiguous leads, left bundle branch block not known to be old, and no absolute

199 Preoperative right bundle branch block (odds ratio [OR], 3.6; 95% confidenc

200 When multivariate analyses were used, left bundle-branch block (odds ratio [OR]=0.22; 95% CI=0.20 t

201 Heart failure patients with left bundle branch block often benefit acutely from CRT; howe

202 Patients with left bundle branch block often have septal perfusion defects

203 diographic cardiomegaly, and q waves or left bundle branch block on an electrocardiogram.

204 The presence of left bundle-branch block on the electrocardiogram may conceal

205 (paced rhythms, ventricular rhythms, or left bundle-branch block) on the ECG performed before thrombo

206 ere most pronounced among patients with left bundle branch block or a QRS duration at least 150 ms an

207 d the clinical outcome of patients with left bundle branch block or intraventricular conduction delay

208 logic Q waves on the electrocardiogram, left bundle branch block or nonischemic cardiomyopathy were n

209 onged P-R interval, but not incomplete right bundle-branch block or early repolarization patterns, in

210 cardia, QRS prolongation resulting from left bundle-branch block or intraventricular conduction delay

211 patients with a non-LBBB QRS pattern (right bundle-branch block or intraventricular conduction distu

212 ry (OR 4.6; P = 0.016), the presence of left bundle branch block (OR 39; P = 0.002), and first-degree

213 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.3), preoperative left bundle branch block (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.9), preop

214 ration >/=150 ms (OR: 1.79; p = 0.007), left bundle branch block (OR: 2.05; p = 0.006), body mass ind

215 abnormalities, left ventricular hypertrophy, bundle branch block, or left-axis deviation) or exercise

216 Right bundle-branch block- or multiple-morphology EIVA is asso

217 > 0.2), first-degree heart block (P = 0.12), bundle-branch block (P > 0.2), and ST-segment abnormalit

218 (19.4%) versus transient (5.6%) or no (3.5%) bundle-branch block (P < .001).

219 h a higher rate of new onset persistent left bundle branch block, particularly in patients receiving

220 respectively) and nonsignificant in non-left bundle branch block patients (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.77 to

221 long-term clinical outcomes of 537 non-left bundle branch block patients with mild HF enrolled in th

222 Left bundle-branch block patients have a high mortality after

223 Left bundle-branch block patients with chest pain were greate

224 Left bundle-branch block patients with MI who present without

225 Among 1274 left bundle-branch block patients, 413 (32%) presented with G

226 Among non-left bundle-branch block patients, low GFR predicted outcomes

227 ferentiated from the A-LV summit VAs by left bundle branch block pattern, QRS duration </=175 ms, pre

228 icular fibrillation characterized by a right bundle-branch block pattern and ST elevation (STE) in th

229 tricular contractions with right and/or left bundle branch block patterns were identified.

230 In patients with left bundle branch block, pharmacologic stress is more specif

231 ease, left ventricular hypertrophy, and left bundle-branch block predicted risk of HFREF.

232 after the procedure, three of whom had right bundle branch block preoperatively.

233 entricular enlargement only, one with a left bundle branch block) presented with advanced HF and SCD,

234 and male sex, left ventricular hypertrophy, bundle branch block, previous myocardial infarction, and

235 tensive ST-segment elevation, new-onset left bundle branch block, previous myocardial infarction, Kil

236 raventricular conduction delay but not right bundle-branch block provided prognostic information abou

237 P<0.001) along with elimination of the right bundle branch block QRS morphology, increase in RV filli

238 ion (OR=0.32; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.53) and left bundle-branch block QRS morphology (OR=0.21; 95% CI, 0.1

239 score (female sex, nonischemic origin, left bundle-branch block, QRS >/=150 milliseconds, prior hosp

240 , SA was found to increase the risk of right bundle branch block (RBBB) (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 56.3

241 aventricular tachycardia with aberrant right bundle branch block (RBBB) and left anterior hemiblock (

242 ock (LBBB) was present in 65 patients, right bundle branch block (RBBB) in 48 patients, and nonspecif

243 udy sought to test the hypothesis that right bundle branch block (RBBB) patients have larger scar siz

244 lock may be made when catheter-induced right bundle-branch block (RBBB) develops in patients with bas

245 mapping, including all 4 patients with right bundle-branch block (RBBB) VT.

246 Right bundle-branch block (RBBB) was present in 11 patients (2

247 RV problems may include right bundle-branch block (RBBB), volume loading, and chamber

248 of ventricular tachycardia (VT) with a right bundle-branch block (RBBB)-type pattern and an R-S ratio

249 with few patients in subgroups such as right bundle-branch block (RBBB).

250 ostic ECG markers in the presence of a right bundle-branch block (RBBB).

251 Left bundle branch block reduced peak Vo(2) (by 10.5 ml.kg(-1

252 nization therapy for heart failure with left bundle branch block reduces left ventricular (LV) conduc

253 e studied 383 consecutive patients with left bundle branch block referred for perfusion scintigraphy

254 Patients with left bundle-branch block, regardless of baseline renal functi

255 However, persistent bundle-branch block remains predictive of a higher morta

256 excitation, as well as during right or left bundle branch block, resembled experimental measurements

257 ior hemiblock (RR: 1.62; p < 0.01), or right bundle branch block (RR: 2.89; p < 0.01) at baseline; an

258 ents with congenital heart disease and right bundle branch block, RV cardiac resynchronization therap

259 atients with systolic heart failure and left bundle-branch block scheduled for cardiac resynchronizat

260 , nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, left bundle branch block, signal-averaged electrocardiogram,

261 patients with QRS 120 to 149 ms or non-left bundle branch block, significant associations of baselin

262 Left bundle branch block significantly determines resting t-I

263 eria (QRS duration of 120-149 ms or non-left bundle branch block), SSI>/=9.7% was independently assoc

264 ribed in patients with the syndrome of right bundle branch block, ST-segment elevation in leads V1 to

265 Case 1 showed a left bundle branch block/superior axis, case 2 showed a right

266 In the absence of bundle branch block, the extent of abnormality of signal

267 an 6 hours after the onset of symptoms, left bundle branch block, total ST-segment elevation of 6 mm

268 was relatively well preserved, and the right bundle-branch block type of BBR was frequently induced.

269 Patients with either right bundle-branch block type or polymorphic complex ventricu

270 ree patients with systolic heart failure and bundle-branch block underwent implantation of biventricu

271 reverse remodeling is predicted by the left bundle branch block ventricular activation sequence, the

272 T waves on inferior leads, and all had right bundle-branch block ventricular arrhythmias.

273 depression greater than 1 mm, complete left bundle-branch block, ventricular paced rhythm, preexcita

274 Left bundle branch block was associated with higher LV mass a

275 n 46% of septal myectomy patients, and right bundle branch block was evident in 58% of alcohol septal

276 in the VA interval with the development of a bundle branch block was the only tachycardia characteris

277 eath from any cause among patients with left bundle-branch block was 18% among patients randomly assi

278 The overall incidence of bundle-branch block was 23.6% (n = 161), with transient

279 an electrocardiographic pattern showing left bundle-branch block was associated with a significant re

280 Bundle-branch block was characterized as right, left, al

281 Right bundle-branch block was found in 13% (n = 89) of the pop

282 Complete or incomplete left bundle-branch block was found in 15.4% of the parents an

283 ound in 13% (n = 89) of the population; left bundle-branch block was found in 7% (n = 48).

284 Right bundle-branch block was not associated with arrhythmic o

285 Complete or incomplete right bundle-branch block was observed in 39.2% of the parents

286 Alternating bundle-branch block was seen in 3.5% (n = 24) of patient

287 th complete, partial and no reversion of the bundle branch block were 8%, 12% and 20%, respectively (

288 Mortality rates in patients with and without bundle-branch block were 8.7% and 3.5%, respectively (P

289 urface electrocardiographic patterns of left bundle-branch block were all noted during intentional an

290 prognostic information in patients with left bundle-branch block, which is incremental to clinical as

291 on-4, we studied patients with STEMI or left bundle branch block who received acute reperfusion with

292 associated with ST-segment elevation or left bundle branch block who underwent primary angioplasty.

293 dy group consisted of 245 patients with left bundle-branch block who underwent tomographic (single ph

294 associated with ST-segment elevation or left bundle-branch block who were treated with primary angiop

295 acute STEMI (including 3 patients with left bundle-branch block) who were undergoing infarct-artery

296 pidemia, and had more often a non-LBBB (left bundle branch block) wide QRS complex, and lower left ve

297 h a higher rate of new onset persistent left bundle branch block with the CoreValve (47.7% versus 35.

298 %, 55% ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 71% left bundle-branch block) with a follow-up of 29+/-11 months.

299 able adjustment, older age, female sex, left bundle branch block, worsened heart failure class, highe