| Literature DB >> 31007792 |
Benjamin J Sieniewicz1,2, Tom Jackson1,2, Simon Claridge1,2, Helder Pereira1, Justin Gould1,2, Baldeep Sidhu1,2, Bradley Porter1,2, Steve Niederer1, Cheng Yao3, Christopher A Rinaldi1,2.
Abstract
AIM: Quadripolar lead technology and multi-point pacing (MPP) are important clinical adjuncts in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) pacing aimed at reducing the rate of non-response to therapy. Mixed results have been achieved using MPP and it is critical to identify which patients require this approach and how to configure their MPP stimulation, in order to achieve optimal electrical resynchronization. METHODS &Entities:
Keywords: CRT; electrocardiographic mapping; multi‐point pacing; multi‐site pacing; non‐responders
Year: 2019 PMID: 31007792 PMCID: PMC6457383 DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Arrhythm ISSN: 1880-4276
Figure 1Multi‐panel plot showing a comparison between late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) derived scar from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and areas of low voltage indicated scarred myocardium. A, LGE CMR in short axis showing areas of transmural hyperenhancement in the mid‐septum. B, Areas of LGE derived scar rendered onto on a 3‐D shell of the LV in RAO angulation. C, Areas of LGE displayed on a 16 segment bulls‐eye plot of the LV. D, The CARDIOINSIGHT ™ electrocardiographic mapping vest is applied to the thorax. E, Voltage thresholded CARDIOINSIGHT ™ electrocardiographic map in RAO angulation. Areas of <2mv are displayed in red. F, Areas of low voltage displayed on a 16 segment bulls‐eye plot of the LV
Mean electrical response of each optimization strategy
| Electrical response | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VVsync ms (range) | VVTAT ms (range) | LVTAT ms (range) | LV disp (range) | |
| Optimization strategy | ||||
| AV optimization | −15.67 (−59 to 17) | 89.03 (57‐129) | 86.97 (57‐129) | 28.33 (18‐43) |
| VV optimization | −4.9 (−28 to 42) | 86.4 (51‐125) | 81.3 (51‐125) | 25.45 (15‐41) |
| Change in LV vector | −4.26 (−30 to 23) | 84.62 (55‐144) | 78.59 (55‐144) | 24.72 (17‐48) |
| MPP on | −1.17 (−20 to 32) | 87.6 (58‐141) | 81.17 (54‐141) | 25.03 (15‐48) |
Figure 2Electrocardiographic activation metrics and directional activation maps during device optimization of Patient 1. A voltage map thresholded to 2mv is shown with a still from the CMR short axis stack (SAX)
Figure 3Electrocardiographic activation metrics and directional activation maps during device optimization of Patient 2. A voltage map thresholded to 2mv is shown with a still from the CMR short axis stack (SAX)
Figure 4Electrocardiographic activation metrics and directional activation maps during device optimization of Patient 3. A voltage map thresholded to 2mv is shown
Figure 5Electrocardiographic activation metrics and directional activation maps during device optimization of Patient 4. A voltage map thresholded to 2mv is shown with a still from the CMR short axis stack (SAX)
Figure 6Electrocardiographic activation metrics and directional activation maps during device optimization of Patient 5
| Age | 62 |
| Sex | M |
| Aetiology | ICM |
| LVEF | 28% |
| Rhythm | SR |
| QRS morphology | LBBB |
| QRS width | 170 |
| PR interval | 210 |
| Age | 50 |
| Sex | M |
| Aetiology | ICM |
| LVEF | 33% |
| Rhythm | SR |
| QRS morphology | LBBB |
| QRS width | 176 |
| PR interval | 218 |
| Age | 55 |
| Sex | M |
| Aetiology | ICM |
| LVEF | 13% |
| Rhythm | AF |
| QRS morphology | LBBB |
| QRS width | 160 |
| PR interval | N/A |
| Age | 59 |
| Sex | M |
| Aetiology | ICM |
| LVEF | 30% |
| Rhythm | SR |
| QRS morphology | LBBB |
| QRS width | 160 |
| PR interval | 172 |
| Age | 83 |
| Sex | F |
| Aetiology | NICM |
| LVEF | 35% |
| Rhythm | AF |
| QRS morphology | RV paced |
| QRS width | 174 |
| PR interval | N/A |