AIMS: Left ventricular (LV) lead positioning for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is largely empirical and operator-dependent. Our aim was to determine whether cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-guided CRT may improve the acute and the chronic response. METHODS AND RESULTS: CMR-derived anatomical models and dyssynchrony maps were created for 20 patients. The CMR targets (three latest activated segments with <50% scar) were overlaid on to live fluoroscopy. Acute haemodynamic response (AHR) to LV pacing was assessed using an intra-ventricular pressure wire. Chronic CRT response (end-systolic volume reduction ≥15%) was assessed 6 months post-implantation. All patients underwent successful CMR-guided LV lead placement. A CMR target segment was paced in 75% of patients. The mean change in LVdP/dtmax for the CMR target was +14.2 ± 12.5 vs. +18.7 ± 11.9% for the best AHR in any segment and +12.0 ± 13.8% for the segment based on coronary sinus (CS) venography. Using CMR guidance, the acute responder rate was 60 vs. 50% on the basis of venography. At 6 months 60% of patients were echocardiographic responders. Of the echocardiographic responders, 92% were successfully paced in a CMR target segment compared with only 50% of non-responders (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: CMR guidance compared well when validated against the AHR. Lead placement was possible in the CMR target region in most patients with an AHR comparable with the best achieved in any CS branch. The chronic response was significantly better in patients paced in a CMR target segment. These results suggest that CMR guidance may represent a clinically useful tool for CRT.
AIMS: Left ventricular (LV) lead positioning for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is largely empirical and operator-dependent. Our aim was to determine whether cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-guided CRT may improve the acute and the chronic response. METHODS AND RESULTS: CMR-derived anatomical models and dyssynchrony maps were created for 20 patients. The CMR targets (three latest activated segments with <50% scar) were overlaid on to live fluoroscopy. Acute haemodynamic response (AHR) to LV pacing was assessed using an intra-ventricular pressure wire. Chronic CRT response (end-systolic volume reduction ≥15%) was assessed 6 months post-implantation. All patients underwent successful CMR-guided LV lead placement. A CMR target segment was paced in 75% of patients. The mean change in LVdP/dtmax for the CMR target was +14.2 ± 12.5 vs. +18.7 ± 11.9% for the best AHR in any segment and +12.0 ± 13.8% for the segment based on coronary sinus (CS) venography. Using CMR guidance, the acute responder rate was 60 vs. 50% on the basis of venography. At 6 months 60% of patients were echocardiographic responders. Of the echocardiographic responders, 92% were successfully paced in a CMR target segment compared with only 50% of non-responders (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: CMR guidance compared well when validated against the AHR. Lead placement was possible in the CMR target region in most patients with an AHR comparable with the best achieved in any CS branch. The chronic response was significantly better in patients paced in a CMR target segment. These results suggest that CMR guidance may represent a clinically useful tool for CRT.
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: Antonios P Antoniadis; Jonathan M Behar; Simon Claridge; Tom Jackson; Manav Sohal; Christopher Aldo Rinaldi Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 2.931
Authors: George Bazoukis; Jeremy Man Ho Hui; Yan Hiu Athena Lee; Oscar Hou In Chou; Dimitrios Sfairopoulos; Konstantinos Vlachos; Athanasios Saplaouras; Konstantinos P Letsas; Michael Efremidis; Gary Tse; Vassilios S Vassiliou; Panagiotis Korantzopoulos Journal: Heart Fail Rev Date: 2022-08-31 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Gregory R Hartlage; Jonathan D Suever; Stephanie Clement-Guinaudeau; Patrick T Strickland; Nima Ghasemzadeh; R Patrick Magrath; Ankit Parikh; Stamatios Lerakis; Michael H Hoskins; Angel R Leon; Michael S Lloyd; John N Oshinski Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Jonathan M Behar; Tom Jackson; Eoin Hyde; Simon Claridge; Jaswinder Gill; Julian Bostock; Manav Sohal; Bradley Porter; Mark O'Neill; Reza Razavi; Steve Niederer; Christopher Aldo Rinaldi Journal: JACC Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2016-12
Authors: Steven Niederer; Cameron Walker; Andrew Crozier; Eoin R Hyde; Bojan Blazevic; Jonathan M Behar; Simon Claridge; Manav Sohal; Anoop Shetty; Tom Jackson; Christopher Rinaldi Journal: Clin Trials Regul Sci Cardiol Date: 2015-12