Literature DB >> 22552761

Bifocal right ventricular pacing: an alternative way to achieve resynchronization when left ventricular lead insertion is unsuccessful.

Skevos Sideris1, Constantina Aggeli, Emmanouil Poulidakis, Kostas Gatzoulis, Ioannis Vlaseros, Katerina Avgeropoulou, Ioannis Felekos, Ilias Sotiropoulos, Christodoulos Stefanadis, Ioannis Kallikazaros.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Bifocal pacing in the right ventricle is an option for patients with end-stage heart failure in whom biventricular pacing is not possible, due to failure in left ventricular (LV) lead insertion. The purpose of this prospective study was to document the clinical response of these patients, after bifocal pacing.
METHODS: From the patients referred for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), from 2009 to 2010, 13 cardiac CRT candidates who underwent unsuccessful LV lead implantation were included. The bifocal system's leads were implanted in the right atrium, the right ventricular (RV) apex, and the RV outflow tract. Initial patient assessment and follow-up evaluation after 6 months included clinical criteria, echocardiographic indices, and biochemical parameters.
RESULTS: From 13 patients (age 68 ± 9 years, nine male), 10 improved clinically. New York Heart Association classification was reduced by one grade (from 3.6 ± 0.5 to 2.8 ± 0.8, p < 0.005 and respectively), while hospitalizations in 6-month time were reduced from three to one (p < 0.001). Six-minute walk test (in meters) increased from 176 ± 86 to 297 ± 91 (p < 0.001) and quality of life improved (EQ-VAS scale changed from 42 ± 12.5 % to 70.8 ± 20.3 %, p < 0.001). Mean shortening in QRS duration was 31.3 ms (from 165.1 ± 16.3 to 133.8 ± 12.7, p < 0.001) and B-type natriuretic peptide (in picograms per milliliter) dropped from 834 ± 350 to 621 ± 283 (p < 0.001). Ejection fraction (in percent) increased from 27.5 ± 4.6 to 33.3 ± 4.4 (p < 0.001), and mitral regurgitation severity decreased by one grade (from 2.7 ± 0.9 to 1.8 ± 0.7, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: RV bifocal pacing seems to offer a substantial clinical benefit to heart failure patients with traditional CRT indications and could be an alternative option when LV access is unsuccessful.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22552761     DOI: 10.1007/s10840-012-9681-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1383-875X            Impact factor:   1.900


  37 in total

Review 1.  Pacing in heart failure: the benefit of resynchronization.

Authors:  Yaariv Khaykin; Eduardo B Saad; Bruce L Wilkoff
Journal:  Cleve Clin J Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.321

2.  2010 Focused Update of ESC Guidelines on device therapy in heart failure: an update of the 2008 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure and the 2007 ESC guidelines for cardiac and resynchronization therapy. Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association and the European Heart Rhythm Association.

Authors:  Kenneth Dickstein; Panos E Vardas; Angelo Auricchio; Jean-Claude Daubert; Cecilia Linde; John McMurray; Piotr Ponikowski; Silvia Giuliana Priori; Richard Sutton; Dirk J van Veldhuisen
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 29.983

3.  Bifocal right ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapies in patients with unsuccessful percutaneous lateral left ventricular venous access.

Authors:  D O'Donnell; V Nadurata; A Hamer; P Kertes; U Mohamed; W Mohammed
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 1.976

4.  Safety of transvenous cardiac resynchronization system implantation in patients with chronic heart failure: combined results of over 2,000 patients from a multicenter study program.

Authors:  Angel R León; William T Abraham; Anne B Curtis; James P Daubert; Westby G Fisher; John Gurley; David L Hayes; Randy Lieberman; Susan Petersen-Stejskal; Kevin Wheelan
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2005-12-20       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Comparison of the haemodynamics of different pacing sites in patients undergoing resynchronisation treatment: need for individualisation of lead localisation.

Authors:  C M C van Campen; F C Visser; C C de Cock; H S Vos; O Kamp; C A Visser
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2006-06-27       Impact factor: 5.994

6.  Ventricular resynchronization: comparing biventricular and bifocal right ventricular pacemakers.

Authors:  Eduardo Arrais Rocha; Tatiana Pereira Gondim; Sebastião Abreu; Roberto Farias; Vera Marques; Almino Rocha; Demóstenes Ribeiro; Ricardo Pereira; Pedro Negreiros; Carlos Roberto M Rodrigues; José Nogueira Paes
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.000

7.  Is bifocal right ventricular pacing a viable form of cardiac resynchronization?

Authors:  S Serge Barold; Roberto Audoglio; Pier Antonio Ravazzi; Paolo Diotallevi
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.976

8.  Right ventricular outflow tract pacing: practical and beneficial. A 9-year experience of 460 consecutive implants.

Authors:  Stephen C Vlay
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.976

9.  Biventricular pacing for congestive heart failure: early experience in surgical epicardial versus coronary sinus lead placement.

Authors:  Hironori Izutani; Kara J Quan; Lee A Biblo; Inderjit S Gill
Journal:  Heart Surg Forum       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 0.676

10.  The effect of cardiac resynchronization on morbidity and mortality in heart failure.

Authors:  John G F Cleland; Jean-Claude Daubert; Erland Erdmann; Nick Freemantle; Daniel Gras; Lukas Kappenberger; Luigi Tavazzi
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-03-07       Impact factor: 91.245

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.