| Literature DB >> 19695099 |
Julien Magne1, Michelle Dubois, Jean Champagne, Jean G Dumesnil, Philippe Pibarot, François Philippon, Gilles O'Hara, Mario Sénéchal.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves left ventricular (LV) volumes, mitral regurgitation (MR) severity and symptoms of patients with heart failure (HF). However, >or= 30% of patients have no significant clinical or echocardiographic improvement following CRT. Reverse remodeling after CRT correlates with improved clinical outcomes. We hypothesized that in NT-pro BNP monitoring is accurate to identify responders following CRT.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19695099 PMCID: PMC2744656 DOI: 10.1186/1476-7120-7-39
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound ISSN: 1476-7120 Impact factor: 2.062
Baseline demographic and clinical data.
| Age, years | 66 ± 12 | 66 ± 11 | 66 ± 15 | 0.83 |
| Male, n (%) | 30 (68) | 19 (65) | 10 (77) | 0.45 |
| CAD, n (%) | 30 (68) | 18 (62) | 11 (85) | 0.13 |
| QRS duration, ms | 159 ± 28 | 162 ± 27 | 155 ± 30 | 0.51 |
| LBBB, n (%) | 27 (61) | 19 (65) | 6 (46) | 0.24 |
| RBBB, n (%) | 2 (4.5) | 2 (7) | 0 (0) | ... |
| IVCD, n (%) | 8 (18) | 3 (10) | 5 (38) | 0.04 |
| PR, ms | 180 ± 40 | 172 ± 32 | 195 ± 51 | 0.08 |
| Pre-CRT pacing, n (%) | 7 (16) | 5 (17) | 2 (15) | 0.88 |
| NYHA III/IV, n (%) | 31 (70)/13 (30) | 22 (76)/7 (24) | 7 (54)/6 (46) | 0.16 |
| Diuretic, n (%) | 41 (93) | 27 (93) | 12 (92) | 0.93 |
| β-Blockers, n (%) | 41 (93) | 26 (90) | 13 (100) | 0.13 |
| ACEi, n (%) | 31 (70) | 20 (69) | 10 (77) | 0.59 |
| AR Blockers, n (%) | 13 (30) | 9 (32) | 3 (23) | 0.55 |
| Digoxin, n (%) | 11 (25) | 5 (17) | 6 (46) | 0.06 |
| Spironolactone, n (%) | 26 (59) | 15 (52) | 10 (77) | 0.12 |
CAD indicates coronary arteries disease, LBBB, left bundle branch block, RBBB, right bundle branch block, IVCD, intraventricular conduction defect, ACEi, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and AR, angiotensin receptors.
Figure 1Changes in Nt-pro BNP in responders and non responders defined as a decrease ≥ 15% in LV end systolic volume 3 to 6 months post CRT. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM.
Baseline and late post-CRT Echocardiographic data.
| LV end-systolic Volume, ml | ||||
| Baseline | 177 ± 65 | 175 ± 64 | 189 ± 62 | 0.49 |
| Late post-CRT | 155 ± 67 | 133 ± 57* | 198 ± 67 | 0.0017 |
| LV end-diastolic Volume, ml | ||||
| Baseline | 213 ± 69 | 209 ± 67 | 228 ± 67 | 0.40 |
| Late post-CRT | 201 ± 73 | 181 ± 66* | 239 ± 72* | 0.01 |
| LV stroke Volume, ml | ||||
| Baseline | 42 ± 13 | 39 ± 10 | 50 ± 13 | 0.0048 |
| Late post-CRT | 51 ± 11 | 51 ± 9* | 49 ± 14 | 0.65 |
| LV ejection fraction, % | ||||
| Baseline | 19 ± 7 | 18 ± 7 | 19 ± 7 | 0.75 |
| Late post-CRT | 24 ± 9 | 27 ± 9* | 18 ± 6 | 0.0025 |
| Wall Motion Score Index | ||||
| Baseline rest | 3.5 ± 0.4 | 3.4 ± 0.4 | 3.6 ± 0.2 | 0.29 |
| Baseline dobutamine | 3.1 ± 0.4 | 3 ± 0.4* | 3.3 ± 0.4* | 0.038 |
| 30 (71) | 24 (83) | 6 (46) | 0.02 | |
| Effective orifice Area, mm2 | ||||
| Baseline | 18 ± 13 | 18 ± 12 | 17 ± 14 | 0.73 |
| Late post-CRT | 10 ± 11 | 5 ± 5* | 19 ± 15 | < 0.0001 |
| Regurgitant Volume, ml | ||||
| Baseline | 29 ± 26 | 31 ± 29 | 25 ± 19 | 0.54 |
| Late post-CRT | 17 ± 17 | 11 ± 13* | 29 ± 19 | 0.0009 |
| Severe Mitral Regurgitation, n (%) | ||||
| Baseline | 19 (45) | 12 (41) | 7 (54) | 0.45 |
| Late post-CRT | 10 (61) | 2 (7)* | 8 (61) | 0.0005 |
| Interventricular, ms | 46 ± 27 | 46 ± 30 | 45 ± 22 | 0.92 |
| Intraventricular, ms | 85 ± 25 | 85 ± 25 | 85 ± 27 | 0.93 |
LV indicates left-ventricular and CRT, cardiac resynchronisation therapy. * significant difference (p < 0.05) between baseline and late post-CRT or between rest and dobutamine data; severe mitral regurgitation is defined as an effective orifice area ≥ 20 mm2.
Figure 2Correlation between changes in effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) area and changes in LV end-systolic volumes.
Figure 3Correlation between changes in effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) area and changes in LV end-diastolic volumes.
Figure 4Correlation between changes in NT-pro BNP and changes in LV end-systolic volume.
Figure 5Correlation between changes in NT-pro BNP and changes in effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) area.
Figure 6Correlation between changes in NT-pro BNP and changes in LV wall motion score index (WMSI) during dobutamine stress echocardiography.
Figure 7Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysing the accuracy of absolute changes in NT-pro BNP to identify CRT response.
Figure 8Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysing the accuracy of relative changes in NT-pro BNP to identify CRT response.