CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

充血性心力衰竭

Abstract

Recommended Article

sST2 Predicts Outcome in Chronic Heart Failure Beyond NT−proBNP and High-Sensitivity Troponin T The spectrum of heart failure: value of left ventricular ejection fraction and its moving trajectories Efficacy of Ertugliflozin on Heart Failure–Related Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Established Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Results of the VERTIS CV Trial Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Inotrope-Dependent Heart Failure Patients - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA–PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America Risk of Mortality Following Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation Clinical trial design and rationale of the Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) investigational device exemption clinical study protocol

Clinical Trial2018 Mar;11(3):e005912.

JOURNAL:Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. Article Link

Can We Use the Intrinsic Left Ventricular Delay (QLV) to Optimize the Pacing Configuration for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With a Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead?

van Everdingen WM, Zweerink A, Cramer MJ et al. Keywords: cardiac resynchronization therapy; heart failure; hemodynamics; humans; stroke volume

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUNDPrevious studies indicated the importance of the intrinsic left ventricular (LV) electric delay (QLV) for optimal benefit to cardiac resynchronization therapy. We investigated the use of QLV for achieving optimal acute hemodynamic response to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a quadripolar LV lead.


METHODS AND RESULTS - Forty-eight heart failure patients with a left bundle branch block were prospectively enrolled (31 men; age, 66±10 years; LV ejection fraction, 28±8%; QRS duration, 176±14 ms). Immediately after cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation, invasive LV pressure-volume loops were recorded during biventricular pacing with each separate electrode at 4 atrioventricular delays. Acute cardiac resynchronization therapy response, measured as change in stroke work (Δ%SW) compared with intrinsic conduction, was related to intrinsic interval between Q on the ECG and LV sensing delay (QLV), normalized for QRS duration (QLV/QRSd), and electrode position. QLV/QRSd was 84±9% and variation between the 4 electrodes 9±5%. Δ%SW was 89±64% and varied by 39±36% between the electrodes. In univariate analysis, an anterolateral or lateral electrode position and a high QLV/QRSd had a significant association with a large Δ%SW (all P <0.01). In a combined model, only QLV/QRSd remained significantly associated with Δ%SW (P<0.05). However, a direct relation between QLV/QRSd and Δ%SW was only seen in 24 patients, whereas 24 patients showed an inverse relation.

CONCLUSIONS - The large variation in acute hemodynamic response indicates that the choice of the stimulated electrode on a quadripolar lead is important. Although QLV/QRSd was associated with acute hemodynamic response at group level, it cannot be used to select the optimal electrode in the individual patient.

© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.