OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the impact of the left ventricular (LV) pacing site on hemodynamic response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). BACKGROUND: CRT reduces morbidity and mortality in heart failure patients. However, 20% to 40% of eligible patients may not fully benefit from CRT device implantation. We hypothesized that selecting the optimal LV pacing site could be critical in this issue. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy referred for CRT device implantation were studied. Intraventricular dyssynchrony and latest activated LV wall were defined by tissue Doppler imaging analysis before the study. Eleven predetermined LV pacing sites were systematically assessed in random order: basal and mid-cavity (septal, anterior, lateral, inferior), apex, coronary sinus (CS), and the endocardial site facing the CS pacing site. For each patient, +dP/dT(max), -dP/dT(min), pulse pressure, and end-systolic pressure during baseline (AAI) and DDD LV pacing were compared. Two atrioventricular delays were tested. RESULTS: Major interindividual and intraindividual variations of hemodynamic response depending on the LV pacing site were observed. Compared with baseline, LV DDD pacing at the best LV position significantly improved +dP/dT(max) (+31 +/- 26%, p < 0.001) and was superior to pacing the CS (+15 +/- 23%, p < 0.001), the lateral LV wall (+18 +/- 22%, p < 0.001), or the latest activated LV wall (+11 +/- 17%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The pacing site is a primary determinant of the hemodynamic response to LV pacing in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. Pacing at the best LV site is associated acutely with fewer nonresponders and twice the improvement in +dP/dT(max) observed with CS pacing. Copyright 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the impact of the left ventricular (LV) pacing site on hemodynamic response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). BACKGROUND: CRT reduces morbidity and mortality in heart failurepatients. However, 20% to 40% of eligible patients may not fully benefit from CRT device implantation. We hypothesized that selecting the optimal LV pacing site could be critical in this issue. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy referred for CRT device implantation were studied. Intraventricular dyssynchrony and latest activated LV wall were defined by tissue Doppler imaging analysis before the study. Eleven predetermined LV pacing sites were systematically assessed in random order: basal and mid-cavity (septal, anterior, lateral, inferior), apex, coronary sinus (CS), and the endocardial site facing the CS pacing site. For each patient, +dP/dT(max), -dP/dT(min), pulse pressure, and end-systolic pressure during baseline (AAI) and DDD LV pacing were compared. Two atrioventricular delays were tested. RESULTS: Major interindividual and intraindividual variations of hemodynamic response depending on the LV pacing site were observed. Compared with baseline, LV DDD pacing at the best LV position significantly improved +dP/dT(max) (+31 +/- 26%, p < 0.001) and was superior to pacing the CS (+15 +/- 23%, p < 0.001), the lateral LV wall (+18 +/- 22%, p < 0.001), or the latest activated LV wall (+11 +/- 17%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The pacing site is a primary determinant of the hemodynamic response to LV pacing in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. Pacing at the best LV site is associated acutely with fewer nonresponders and twice the improvement in +dP/dT(max) observed with CS pacing. Copyright 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Antonios P Antoniadis; Ben Sieniewicz; Justin Gould; Bradley Porter; Jessica Webb; Simon Claridge; Jonathan M Behar; Christopher Aldo Rinaldi Journal: Curr Heart Fail Rep Date: 2017-10
Authors: Jonathan M Behar; Julian Bostock; Matthew Ginks; Tom Jackson; Manav Sohal; Simon Claridge; Reza Razavi; Christopher Aldo Rinaldi Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 1.900