David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Review 68 (4):469-492 (1959)
Background: Differential diagnosis between ischemic (IDCM) and the nonischemic type (NIDCM) of cardiomyopathy constitutes a challenge in the daily medical practice. Carotid and aortic elastic properties deteriorate in patients with coronary artery disease. However, their predictive role in differentiating IDCM from NIDCM has not been addressed so far. Aim of the work: To examine carotid and aortic mechanical functions using conventional and Doppler tissue echocardiography in the distinction between IDCM and NIDCM in patients with clinically undetermined etiology. Methods: 70 patients with dilatation and diffuse impairment of the left ventricular (LV) contraction were studied. All patients underwent carotid duplex for measuring intima-media (IMT) thickness, peak systolic velocity (PSV), and luminal diameters (LD). Aortic distensibility, strain, and aortic wall velocities (systolic (Sa), early diastolic (Ea), late diastolic (Aa) velocities, Sat, and Eat) were measured. According to coronary angiographic results, patients were categorized into IDCM (n = 36) (age 57.9 9.2 years) and NIDCM groups (n = 34) (age 56.0 8.3 years); they were compared to 30 age- and sex-matched healthy individuals as a control group. Results: The aortic pulsatile change, aortic strain, and distensibility were significantly reduced in both patient groups in comparison to control (P 0.8 mm predicted IDCM with 94.4%, 72.7%, and 97.2% sensitivity and 88.2%, 85.3%, and 97.1% specificity, respectively. Conclusion: Both carotid and aortic mechanical functions are more deteriorated in ischemic compared with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. Different functional and structural mechanisms might be responsible for the deterioration of arterial elastic properties in each category. 2009, Wiley Periodicals, Inc
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
M. Oreste Fiocco (2012). Is There a Right to Respect? Utilitas 24 (04):502-524.
Eoin O'Connell (2012). Happiness Proportioned to Virtue: Kant and the Highest Good. Kantian Review 17 (2):257-279.
Similar books and articles
Paul Guyer (2003). Beauty, Systematicity, and the Highest Good: Eckart Förster's Kant's Final Synthesis. Inquiry 46 (2):195 – 214.
Matthew Caswell (2006). Kant's Conception of the Highest Good, the Gesinnung, and the Theory of Radical Evil. Kant-Studien 97 (2):184-209.
John R. Silber (1963). The Importance of the Highest Good in Kant's Ethics. Ethics 73 (3):179-197.
Lara Ostaric (2010). Works of Genius as Sensible Exhibitions of the Idea of the Highest Good. Kant-Studien 101 (1):22-39.
Christopher Insole (2008). The Irreducible Importance of Religious Hope in Kant's Conception of the Highest Good. Philosophy 83 (3):333-351.
Pauline Kleingeld (1995). What Do the Virtuous Hope For?: Re-Reading Kant's Doctrine of the Highest Good. In Hoke Robinson (ed.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Kant Congress, Memphis 1995. Marquette University Press.
Edmund Morris Miller (1928). Moral Law and the Highest Good: A Study of Kant's Doctrine of the Highest Good. Melbourne, Macmillan & Co. Ltd. In Association with the Melbourne University Press.
Curtis Bowman (2003). A Deduction of Kant's Concept of the Highest Good. Journal of Philosophical Research 28:45-63.
Lara Denis (2005). Autonomy and the Highest Good. Kantian Review 10 (1):33-59.
Roe Fremstedal (2011). The Concept of the Highest Good in Kierkegaard and Kant. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (3):155-171.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #27,914 of 1,088,371 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #24,149 of 1,088,371 )
How can I increase my downloads?