CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Is Acute heart failure a distinctive disorder? An analysis from BIOSTAT-CHF IVUS Guidance for Coronary Revascularization: When to Start, When to Stop? Left Ventricular Rapid Pacing Via the Valve Delivery Guidewire in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Significantly less inappropriate shocks in ischemic patients compared to non-ischemic patients: The S-ICD experience of a high volume single-center A Genotype-Guided Strategy for Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Primary PCI Intravascular ultrasound findings of early stent thrombosis after primary percutaneous intervention in acute myocardial infarction: a Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) substudy Incidence and Clinical Outcomes of Stent Fractures on the Basis of 6,555 Patients and 16,482 Drug-Eluting Stents From 4 Centers Coronary bifurcation lesions treated with simple or complex stenting: 5-year survival from patient-level pooled analysis of the Nordic Bifurcation Study and the British Bifurcation Coronary Study 3D Printing and Heart Failure: The Present and the Future Novel developments in revascularization for left main coronary artery disease

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.