Literature DB >> 33128179

Non-invasive hemodynamic determination of patient-specific optimal pacing mode in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Virginie Ferchaud1,2, Rodrigue Garcia3, Nicolas Bidegain3, Bruno Degand3, Paul Milliez2, Théo Pezel4, Ghassan Moubarak5,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices have multiple programmable pacing parameters. The purpose of this study was to determine the best pacing mode, i.e., associated with the greatest acute hemodynamic response, in each patient.
METHODS: Patients in sinus rhythm and intact atrioventricular conduction were included within 3 months of implantation of devices featuring SyncAV and multipoint pacing (MPP) algorithms. The effect of nominal biventricular pacing using the latest activated electrode (BiV-Late), optimized atrioventricular delay (AVD), nominal and optimized SyncAV, and anatomical MPP was determined by non-invasive measurement of systolic blood pressure (SBP). CRT response was defined as SBP increase > 10% relative to baseline.
RESULTS: Thirty patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) were included. BiV-Late increased SBP compared to intrinsic rhythm (128 ± 21 mmHg vs. 121 ± 22 mmHg, p = 0.0002). The best pacing mode further increased SBP to 140 ± 19 mmHg (p < 0.0001 vs. BiV-Late). The proportion of CRT responders increased from 40% with BiV-Late to 80% with the best pacing mode (p = 0.0005). Compared to BiV-Late, optimized AVD and optimized SyncAV increased SBP (to 134 ± 21 mmHg, p = 0.004, and 133 ± 20 mmHg, p = 0.0003, respectively), but nominal SyncAV and MPP did not. The best pacing mode was variable between patients and was different from nominal BiV-Late in 28 (93%) patients. Optimized AVD was the most frequent best mode, in 14 (47%) patients.
CONCLUSION: In patients with LBBB, the best pacing mode was patient-specific and doubled the magnitude of acute hemodynamic response and the proportion of acute CRT responders compared to nominal BiV-Late pacing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03779802.
© 2020. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acute hemodynamic response; Atrioventricular delay; Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Multipoint pacing; Pacing algorithm; SyncAV

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33128179     DOI: 10.1007/s10840-020-00908-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1383-875X            Impact factor:   1.900


  2 in total

1.  Perioperative Sensor and Algorithm Programming in Patients with Implanted ICDs and Pacemakers for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

Authors:  Alexander Niedermeier; Laura Vitali-Serdoz; Theodor Fischlein; Wolfgang Kirste; Veronica Buia; Janusch Walaschek; Harald Rittger; Dirk Bastian
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  Atrial fibrillation in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Mark K Elliott; Vishal S Mehta; Dejana Martic; Baldeep S Sidhu; Steven Niederer; Christopher A Rinaldi
Journal:  Heart Rhythm O2       Date:  2021-12-17
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.