Literature DB >> 27634027

Meta-Analysis of the Usefulness of Change in QRS Width to Predict Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

Panagiotis Korantzopoulos1, Zhiwei Zhang2, Guangping Li2, Nikolaos Fragakis3, Tong Liu4.   

Abstract

The existing data regarding the role of QRS duration (QRSd) change on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response show some inconsistent results. We conducted a meta-analysis of data obtained from observational studies to examine the impact of QRS change after CRT device implantation on the clinical and/or echocardiographic response. We searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for relevant studies published before January 2016. Twenty-seven studies were retrieved for detailed evaluation of which 12 studies with a total population of 1,545 patients met our eligibility criteria. The analysis demonstrated that QRSd narrowing was a positive predictor of response to CRT (mean difference [MD] = -19.24 ms, 95% CI = -24.00 to -14.48 ms, p <0.00001). This effect was consistent in the studies using clinical criteria (MD = -19.91 ms, 95% CI = -27.20 to -12.62 ms, p <0.00001) and in those that used echocardiographic criteria (MD = -19.51 ms, 95% CI = -25.78 to -13.25 ms, p <0.00001). The heterogeneity test showed moderate differences among the individual studies (I2 = 42%). Subgroup analysis showed that QRSd change was more pronounced in studies having a follow-up ≤6 months. We did not find significant differences in studies measuring postimplantation QRSd after a certain follow-up period compared with studies measuring QRSd immediately after CRT device implantation. Further studies should clarify the exact timing of QRSd assessments during follow-up. In conclusion, QRSd shortening after CRT device implantation is associated with a favorable clinical and echocardiographic response.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27634027     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.07.070

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  17 in total

1.  Non-invasively quantified changes in left ventricular activation predict outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Daniel J Friedman; Kasper Emerek; Steen Møller Hansen; Christoffer Polcwiartek; Peter L Sørensen; Zak Loring; Joanne Sutter; Peter Søgaard; Joseph Kisslo; Claus Graff; Brett D Atwater
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-10-08

2.  Concomitant changes in ventricular depolarization and repolarization and long-term outcomes of biventricular pacing.

Authors:  Christoffer Polcwiartek; Daniel J Friedman; Kasper Emerek; Claus Graff; Peter L Sørensen; Joseph Kisslo; Zak Loring; Steen M Hansen; Kristian Kragholm; Bhupendar Tayal; Svend E Jensen; Peter Søgaard; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Brett D Atwater
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-09-26       Impact factor: 1.976

3.  Precision of automated QRS duration measurement in patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Casper Lund-Andersen; Helen H Petersen; Christian Jøns; Berit T Philbert; Jacob Tfelt-Hansen; Lene T Skovgaard; Jesper H Svendsen
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 1.900

4.  The response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in LMNA cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Kiran Sidhu; Anna Isotta Castrini; Victoria Parikh; Nosheen Reza; Anjali Owens; Maxime Tremblay-Gravel; Matthew T Wheeler; Luisa Mestroni; Matthew Taylor; Sharon Graw; Marta Gigli; Marco Merlo; Alessia Paldino; Gianfranco Sinagra; Daniel P Judge; Hannia Ramos; Olurotimi Mesubi; Emily Brown; Samual Turnbull; Saurabh Kumar; Darius Roy; Usha B Tedrow; Long Ngo; Kristina Haugaa; Neal K Lakdawala
Journal:  Eur J Heart Fail       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 17.349

5.  Association of QRS narrowing with response to cardiac resynchronization therapy-a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Authors:  George Bazoukis; Katerina K Naka; Alawi Alsheikh-Ali; Gary Tse; Konstantinos P Letsas; Panagiotis Korantzopoulos; Tong Liu; Cynthia Yeung; Michael Efremidis; Konstantinos Tsioufis; Adrian Baranchuk; Stavros Stavrakis
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.214

6.  Six months clinical outcome comparison between quadripolar and bipolar left ventricular leads in cardiac resynchronization therapy: A prospective, non-randomized, single-centre observational study.

Authors:  Ajay Raj; Ajay Pratap Singh; Ranjit Kumar Nath; Neeraj Pandit; Puneet Aggarwal; Ashok Kumar Thakur; Rajeev Bharadwaj; Vinod Kumar
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2021-02-23

7.  Programming Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Electrical Synchrony: Reaching Beyond Left Bundle Branch Block and Left Ventricular Activation Delay.

Authors:  Niraj Varma; David O'Donnell; Mohammed Bassiouny; Philippe Ritter; Carlo Pappone; Jan Mangual; Daniel Cantillon; Nima Badie; Bernard Thibault; Brian Wisnoskey
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 5.501

8.  Surface electrogram-guided left ventricular lead placement improves response to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Abdulcebbar Şipal; Serdar Bozyel; Müjdat Aktaş; Emir Derviş; Tayyar Akbulut; Onur Argan; Umut Çelikyurt; Dilek Ural; Tayfun Şahin; Ayşen Ağır; Ahmet Vural
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.596

9.  Hemodynamic comparison of different multisites and multipoint pacing strategies in cardiac resynchronization therapies.

Authors:  Francesco Zanon; Lina Marcantoni; Enrico Baracca; Gianni Pastore; Giuseppina Giau; Gianluca Rigatelli; Daniela Lanza; Claudio Picariello; Silvio Aggio; Sara Giatti; Marco Zuin; Loris Roncon; Domenico Pacetta; Franco Noventa; Frits W Prinzen
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-04-07       Impact factor: 1.900

10.  QRS narrowing and prediction of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Fatih Mehmet Uçar
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 1.596

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.