Literature DB >> 11139910

Hemodynamic assessment of right, left, and biventricular pacing by peak endocardial acceleration and echocardiography in patients with end-stage heart failure.

P Bordachar1, S Garrigue, S Reuter, M Hocini, A Kobeissi, G Gaggini, P Jaïs, M Haïssaguerre, J Clementy.   

Abstract

Multisite ventricular pacing acutely improves the hemodynamic status in heart failure, though longer-term observations require invasive procedures. The hemodynamics of multisite ventricular pacing were assessed by echocardiography and peak endocardial acceleration (PEA) measured by a pacemaker sensor. PEA variations are highly correlated with those of dP/dt. Thirteen end-stage heart failure patients (left ventricular ejection fraction < 0.30) with a QRS > or = 140 ms received a DDD PEA sensor-driven pacemaker allowing right (RV), left (LV) and biventricular (BV) pacing. Ten days after implantation, standard echocardiographic parameters and variations in PEA were measured after 20 minutes at each pacing mode. The aortic systolic preejection time interval was statistically comparable between RV and LV pacing (218 +/- 24 vs 219 +/- 34 ms; P = NS), and significantly shorter with BV pacing (198 +/- 27 ms; P = 0.013). Aortic ejection duration was nonsignificantly shorter during BV pacing than during LV pacing (-.061, P = 0.09). The aortic velocity time integer increased during LV pacing versus RV pacing (+21%, P < 0.05) and during BV pacing versus RV pacing (+37%, P = 0.05). As a result, the values of the PEA variations over a 15-minute period were significantly greater during LV pacing and BV pacing versus RV pacing (+43%, P < 0.05, and +38%, P = 0.05, respectively) and were statistically comparable between BV pacing and LV pacing (9% for LV pacing, P = NS). During various ventricular pacing configurations, PEA measurements were consistent with echocardiographic data, showing comparable hemodynamic effects of BV and LV pacing. The PEA sensor is a promising tool for long-term hemodynamic monitoring and serial evaluation of the effects of multisite ventricular pacing in heart failure patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11139910     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2000.tb07005.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  6 in total

1.  Comparison of permanent left ventricular and biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation: prospective haemodynamic study.

Authors:  S Garrigue; P Bordachar; S Reuter; P Jaïs; A Kobeissi; G Gaggini; M Haïssaguerre; J Clementy
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  [New technologies in the optimization of CRT programming].

Authors:  A Kloppe; B Lemke; M Zarse
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2008-03

3.  Usefulness of hemodynamic sensors for physiologic cardiac pacing in heart failure patients.

Authors:  Eraldo Occhetta; Miriam Bortnik; Paolo Marino
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 1.866

Review 4.  Atrioventricular and interventricular delay optimization in cardiac resynchronization therapy: physiological principles and overview of available methods.

Authors:  Patrick Houthuizen; Frank A L E Bracke; Berry M van Gelder
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.214

5.  Sensors for rate responsive pacing.

Authors:  Simonetta Dell'Orto; Paolo Valli; Enrico Maria Greco
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2004-07-01

6.  First clinical evaluation of an atrial haemodynamic sensor lead for automatic optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  David Duncker; Peter Paul Delnoy; Herbert Nägele; Jacques Mansourati; Lluís Mont; Frédéric Anselme; Petra Stengel; Francesca Anselmi; Hanno Oswald; Christophe Leclercq
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 5.214

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.