INTRODUCTION: Patients with advanced heart failure and dyssynchrony can benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). To predict the response to CRT, myocardial viability and improved dyssynchrony are suggested to be important. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 93 patients who underwent CRT implantation in Nagoya University Hospital. We assessed QRS narrowing the day after implantation to measure the improvement in dyssynchrony and measured the left ventricular pacing threshold (LVPT) to determine the local myocardial viability in all patients. Responders to CRT were defined as those having a greater than or equal to 15% decrease in left ventricular end-systolic volume by echocardiography at their 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (67%) were classified as responders. The QRS width before CRT implantation, QRS narrowing after implantation, left atrial diameter, septal-to-posterior wall motion delay, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, radial strain, and LVPT were significantly different between the responder and nonresponder groups. On multivariate analysis, QRS narrowing (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.05; P = 0.005) and LVPT (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.82; P = 0.011) were independent predictors of a response to CRT. We calculated the cutoff values from the receiver operating characteristic curves as 22.5 milliseconds of QRS narrowing and 1.55 V of LVPT. The response rates in patients with both predictive factors (QRS narrowing ≥ 22.5 milliseconds and LVPT ≤ 1.55 V), one factor, and no factors were 91%, 61%, and 25%, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both myocardial viability and improved electrical dyssynchrony may be essential to predict a good response to CRT.
INTRODUCTION:Patients with advanced heart failure and dyssynchrony can benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). To predict the response to CRT, myocardial viability and improved dyssynchrony are suggested to be important. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 93 patients who underwent CRT implantation in Nagoya University Hospital. We assessed QRS narrowing the day after implantation to measure the improvement in dyssynchrony and measured the left ventricular pacing threshold (LVPT) to determine the local myocardial viability in all patients. Responders to CRT were defined as those having a greater than or equal to 15% decrease in left ventricular end-systolic volume by echocardiography at their 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (67%) were classified as responders. The QRS width before CRT implantation, QRS narrowing after implantation, left atrial diameter, septal-to-posterior wall motion delay, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, radial strain, and LVPT were significantly different between the responder and nonresponder groups. On multivariate analysis, QRS narrowing (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.05; P = 0.005) and LVPT (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.82; P = 0.011) were independent predictors of a response to CRT. We calculated the cutoff values from the receiver operating characteristic curves as 22.5 milliseconds of QRS narrowing and 1.55 V of LVPT. The response rates in patients with both predictive factors (QRS narrowing ≥ 22.5 milliseconds and LVPT ≤ 1.55 V), one factor, and no factors were 91%, 61%, and 25%, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both myocardial viability and improved electrical dyssynchrony may be essential to predict a good response to CRT.