Modeling the Instantaneous Pressure–Volume Relation of the Left Ventricle: A Comparison of Six Models

Simulations are useful to study the heart’s ability to generate flow and the interaction between contractility and loading conditions. The left ventricular pressure–volume (PV) relation has been shown to be nonlinear, but it is unknown whether a linear model is accurate enough for simulations. Six models were fitted to the PV-data measured in five sheep and the estimated parameters were used to simulate PV-loops. Simulated and measured PV-loops were compared with the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Hamming distance, a measure for geometric shape similarity. The compared models were: a time-varying elastance model with fixed volume intercept (LinFix); a time-varying elastance model with varying volume intercept (LinFree); a Langewouter’s pressure-dependent elasticity model (Langew); a sigmoidal model (Sigm); a time-varying elastance model with a systolic flow-dependent resistance (Shroff) and a model with a linear systolic and an exponential diastolic relation (Burkh). Overall, the best model is LinFree (lowest AIC), closely followed by Langew. The remaining models rank: Sigm, Shroff, LinFix and Burkh. If only the shape of the PV-loops is important, all models perform nearly identically (Hamming distance between 20 and 23%). For realistic simulation of the instantaneous PV-relation a linear model suffices

Effects of Once-Weekly Exenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

Abstract BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo. (Funded by Amylin Pharmaceuticals; EXSCEL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01144338 .)

Mechanisms of endocardial endothelium modulation of myocardial performance

A