AIMS: To determine the mechanism by which left ventricular and biventricular pacing works. BACKGROUND: Pacing for congestive heart failure patients is employed in those with left bundle branch block on the basis that it will improve discoordinated contraction; however, the response is unpredictable. The authors propose that the mechanism of benefit is rather related to improvement of ventricular interaction in diastole (VID). VID is found in patients with a high left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (> 15 mmHg). Left ventricular pacing in these patients will delay right ventricular filling and allow greater left ventricular filling before the onset of VID. METHODS: The study group consisted of 18 congestive heart failure patients with an ejection fraction < 30% and with no more than Grade 1 mitral regurgitation. Group I comprised 10 patients with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > 15 mmHg, four patients had a normal QRS duration and six had left bundle branch block. Group II comprised eight patients with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure < 15 mmHg, of whom five had a normal QRS duration. Haemodynamics were measured at baseline and during VDD pacing from either the left ventricle or right ventricle. RESULTS: The ratio of stroke volume/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was calculated as an index of the relationship between left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and contractile function. This ratio was lower in group I than in group II patients (P = 0.005). In group I, haemodynamics were improved with left ventricular pacing (stroke volume/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure increased from 2.2 +/- 0.9 to 4.4 +/- 3.6, P = 0.03). In group II there was no response to either left ventricular or right ventricular pacing. The improvement with left ventricular pacing was unrelated to QRS duration (r = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular pacing acutely benefits congestive heart failure patients with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > 15 mmHg irrespective of left bundle branch block. The present data suggest that the mechanism of response may be an improvement in left ventricular filling rather than ventricular systolic re-synchronization.
AIMS: To determine the mechanism by which left ventricular and biventricular pacing works. BACKGROUND: Pacing for congestive heart failurepatients is employed in those with left bundle branch block on the basis that it will improve discoordinated contraction; however, the response is unpredictable. The authors propose that the mechanism of benefit is rather related to improvement of ventricular interaction in diastole (VID). VID is found in patients with a high left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (> 15 mmHg). Left ventricular pacing in these patients will delay right ventricular filling and allow greater left ventricular filling before the onset of VID. METHODS: The study group consisted of 18 congestive heart failurepatients with an ejection fraction < 30% and with no more than Grade 1 mitral regurgitation. Group I comprised 10 patients with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > 15 mmHg, four patients had a normal QRS duration and six had left bundle branch block. Group II comprised eight patients with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure < 15 mmHg, of whom five had a normal QRS duration. Haemodynamics were measured at baseline and during VDD pacing from either the left ventricle or right ventricle. RESULTS: The ratio of stroke volume/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was calculated as an index of the relationship between left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and contractile function. This ratio was lower in group I than in group II patients (P = 0.005). In group I, haemodynamics were improved with left ventricular pacing (stroke volume/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure increased from 2.2 +/- 0.9 to 4.4 +/- 3.6, P = 0.03). In group II there was no response to either left ventricular or right ventricular pacing. The improvement with left ventricular pacing was unrelated to QRS duration (r = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular pacing acutely benefits congestive heart failurepatients with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > 15 mmHg irrespective of left bundle branch block. The present data suggest that the mechanism of response may be an improvement in left ventricular filling rather than ventricular systolic re-synchronization.
Authors: R Thaman; R T Murphy; S Firoozi; S M Hamid; J R Gimeno; B Sachdev; V Paul; E Rowland; M P Frenneaux; P M Elliott Journal: Heart Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 5.994