PURPOSE: A left ventricular lead position concordant to viable myocardium at the site of latest mechanical activation is associated with a better response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The present study aimed to guide left ventricular (LV) lead implantation into a vein over the area of latest mechanical activation with no transmural scar as determined by radial strain measured by non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Patients admitted for CRT implantation underwent MRI on the day before pacemaker implantation. Time to peak radial strain in ventricular segments was measured to define the site of latest mechanical activation. Areas with peak radial strain less than 16.5% were defined as transmural scar. Venograms were visualized to define the optimal vein for LV lead positioning. Echocardiograms, 6-min hall walk test, and NYHA class were obtained at baseline and after 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were included. In nine patients the lead was positioned at the primary target site, and in six patients a secondary was used owing to phrenic nerve stimulation (one patient), unstable lead position (two patients) and lack of suitable vein (three patients) at the primary target site. In three patients pre-implant MRI changed the implanters primary target vein. CONCLUSION: Non-contrast MRI can be used to detect the site of latest mechanical activation by radial strain to guide LV lead positioning in candidates for CRT. Image guided LV lead implantation in CRT patients may in some patients change the primary target tributary of the coronary sinus.
PURPOSE: A left ventricular lead position concordant to viable myocardium at the site of latest mechanical activation is associated with a better response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The present study aimed to guide left ventricular (LV) lead implantation into a vein over the area of latest mechanical activation with no transmural scar as determined by radial strain measured by non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS:Patients admitted for CRT implantation underwent MRI on the day before pacemaker implantation. Time to peak radial strain in ventricular segments was measured to define the site of latest mechanical activation. Areas with peak radial strain less than 16.5% were defined as transmural scar. Venograms were visualized to define the optimal vein for LV lead positioning. Echocardiograms, 6-min hall walk test, and NYHA class were obtained at baseline and after 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were included. In nine patients the lead was positioned at the primary target site, and in six patients a secondary was used owing to phrenic nerve stimulation (one patient), unstable lead position (two patients) and lack of suitable vein (three patients) at the primary target site. In three patients pre-implant MRI changed the implanters primary target vein. CONCLUSION: Non-contrast MRI can be used to detect the site of latest mechanical activation by radial strain to guide LV lead positioning in candidates for CRT. Image guided LV lead implantation in CRT patients may in some patients change the primary target tributary of the coronary sinus.
Authors: Aleksandr Rovner; Lisa de Las Fuentes; Mitchell N Faddis; Marye J Gleva; Victor G Dávila-Román; Alan D Waggoner Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2006-11-21 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Panos E Vardas; Angelo Auricchio; Jean-Jacques Blanc; Jean-Claude Daubert; Helmut Drexler; Hugo Ector; Maurizio Gasparini; Cecilia Linde; Francisco Bello Morgado; Ali Oto; Richard Sutton; Maria Trusz-Gluza Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-08-28 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Christian T Stoeck; Yuchi Han; Dana C Peters; Peng Hu; Susan B Yeon; Kraig V Kissinger; Beth Goddu; Lois Goepfert; Warren J Manning; Sebastian Kozerke; Reza Nezafat Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Cheuk-Man Yu; Gabe B Bleeker; Jeffrey Wing-Hong Fung; Martin J Schalij; Qing Zhang; Ernst E van der Wall; Yat-Sun Chan; Shun-Ling Kong; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-09-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Thomas M Helle-Valle; Wen-Chung Yu; Verônica R S Fernandes; Boaz D Rosen; João A C Lima Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2010-08-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Nicolas Derval; Paul Steendijk; Lorne J Gula; Antoine Deplagne; Julien Laborderie; Frederic Sacher; Sebastien Knecht; Matthew Wright; Isabelle Nault; Sylvain Ploux; Philippe Ritter; Pierre Bordachar; Stephane Lafitte; Patricia Réant; George J Klein; Sanjiv M Narayan; Stephane Garrigue; Mélèze Hocini; Michel Haissaguerre; Jacques Clementy; Pierre Jaïs Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-11-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Nina Ajmone Marsan; Jos J M Westenberg; Claudia Ypenburg; Rutger J van Bommel; Stijntje Roes; Victoria Delgado; Laurens F Tops; Rob J van der Geest; Eric Boersma; Albert de Roos; Martin J Schalij; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2009-07-04 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: S Modi; Raymond Yee; David Scholl; John Stirrat; Jorge A Wong; Carmen Lydell; Vamshi Kotha; Lorne J Gula; Allan C Skanes; Peter Leong-Sit; David McCarty; Maria Drangova; James A White Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Weihua Zhou; Ningchao Tao; Xiaofeng Hou; Yao Wang; Russell D Folks; David C Cooke; Valeria M Moncayo; Ernest V Garcia; Jiangang Zou Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 5.952