Literature DB >> 30193853

Time interval from left ventricular stimulation to QRS onset is a novel predictor of nonresponse to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Daigo Yagishita1, Morio Shoda2, Yoshimi Yagishita1, Koichiro Ejima3, Nobuhisa Hagiwara1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) lead placement at the late activation site (LAS) has been proposed as an optimal LV pacing site (ie, Q-LV interval). However, LAS may be relevant to local electrical conduction, measured as an interval from LV pacing stimulation to QRS onset (S-QRS interval).
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of S-QRS for reverse remodeling and the impact of S-QRS on pacing QRS configuration in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).
METHODS: Sixty consecutive heart failure patients with a wide QRS complex underwent CRT. A site with Q-LV ≥95 ms was targeted for LV lead placement. A responder was defined as one with >15% reduction in LV end-systolic volume 6 months after CRT.
RESULTS: LV lead placement with Q-LV ≥95 ms was achieved in 52 of 60 patients (86.7%). Thirty-two of 52 patients (61.5%) were responders. S-QRS was significantly shorter in responders than nonresponders (P <.01), whereas Q-LV was not significantly different. A cutoff value of 37 ms for S-QRS had sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 90%, respectively. Shorter S-QRS (<37 ms) showed significantly narrower LV pacing QRS width and biventricular pacing QRS width compared to longer S-QRS. After multivariate analysis, PQ interval (odds ratio 0.97; P = .01) and long S-QRS ≥ 37ms (odds ratio 0.014; P <.01) were independent predictors of response to CRT.
CONCLUSION: In addition to a sufficient Q-LV, S-QRS can be a useful indicator of optimal LV lead position to achieve reverse remodeling. S-QRS contributes to the pacing QRS configuration associated with CRT response.
Copyright © 2018 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Electrocardiogram; Heart failure; Left ventricular lead; Prognosis; Scar

Year:  2018        PMID: 30193853     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.08.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  3 in total

1.  Pacing in proximity to scar during cardiac resynchronization therapy increases local dispersion of repolarization and susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmogenesis.

Authors:  Caroline Mendonca Costa; Aurel Neic; Eric Kerfoot; Bradley Porter; Benjamin Sieniewicz; Justin Gould; Baldeep Sidhu; Zhong Chen; Gernot Plank; Christopher A Rinaldi; Martin J Bishop; Steven A Niederer
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 6.343

Review 2.  Optimal CRT Implantation-Where and How To Place the Left-Ventricular Lead?

Authors:  Christian Butter; Christian Georgi; Martin Stockburger
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2021-09-08

3.  Left ventricular paced activation in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients with left bundle branch block and relationship to its electrical substrate.

Authors:  Brian J Wisnoskey; Niraj Varma
Journal:  Heart Rhythm O2       Date:  2020-05-11
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.