For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
1
views
21
references
 Top references
cited by
20
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      0
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Electrically vs. imaging-guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy: a randomized controlled trial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims

          To test in a double-blinded, randomized trial whether the combination of electrically guided left ventricular (LV) lead placement and post-implant interventricular pacing delay (VVd) optimization results in superior increase in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients.

          Methods and results

          Stratified according to presence of ischaemic heart disease, 122 patients were randomized 1:1 to LV lead placement targeted towards the latest electrically activated segment identified by systematic mapping of the coronary sinus tributaries during CRT implantation combined with post-implant VVd optimization (intervention group) or imaging-guided LV lead implantation by cardiac computed tomography venography, 82Rubidium myocardial perfusion imaging and speckle tracking echocardiography targeting the LV lead towards the latest mechanically activated non-scarred myocardial segment (control group). Follow-up was 6 months. Primary endpoint was absolute increase in LVEF. Additional outcome measures were changes in New York Heart Association class, 6-minute walk test, and quality of life, LV reverse remodelling, and device related complications. Analysis was intention-to-treat. A larger increase in LVEF was observed in the intervention group (11 ± 10 vs. 7 ± 11%; 95% confidence interval 0.4–7.9%, P = 0.03); when adjusting for pre-specified baseline covariates this difference did not maintain statistical significance (P = 0.09). Clinical response, LV reverse remodelling, and complication rates did not differ between treatment groups.

          Conclusion

          Electrically guided CRT implantation appeared non-inferior to an imaging-guided strategy considering the outcomes of change in LVEF, LV reverse remodelling and clinical response. Larger long-term studies are warranted to investigate the effect of an electrically guided CRT strategy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cardiac-resynchronization therapy for the prevention of heart-failure events.

          Arthur Moss, W Hall, David S Cannom … (2009)
          This trial was designed to determine whether cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing would reduce the risk of death or heart-failure events in patients with mild cardiac symptoms, a reduced ejection fraction, and a wide QRS complex. During a 4.5-year period, we enrolled and followed 1820 patients with ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an ejection fraction of 30% or less, a QRS duration of 130 msec or more, and New York Heart Association class I or II symptoms. Patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2 ratio to receive CRT plus an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (1089 patients) or an ICD alone (731 patients). The primary end point was death from any cause or a nonfatal heart-failure event (whichever came first). Heart-failure events were diagnosed by physicians who were aware of the treatment assignments, but they were adjudicated by a committee that was unaware of assignments. During an average follow-up of 2.4 years, the primary end point occurred in 187 of 1089 patients in the CRT-ICD group (17.2%) and 185 of 731 patients in the ICD-only group (25.3%) (hazard ratio in the CRT-ICD group, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.84; P=0.001). The benefit did not differ significantly between patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and those with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. The superiority of CRT was driven by a 41% reduction in the risk of heart-failure events, a finding that was evident primarily in a prespecified subgroup of patients with a QRS duration of 150 msec or more. CRT was associated with a significant reduction in left ventricular volumes and improvement in the ejection fraction. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the overall risk of death, with a 3% annual mortality rate in each treatment group. Serious adverse events were infrequent in the two groups. CRT combined with ICD decreased the risk of heart-failure events in relatively asymptomatic patients with a low ejection fraction and wide QRS complex. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00180271.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society
          Article 0 comments Cited 522 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure.

            William T. Abraham, Westby G. Fisher, Andrew L. Smith … (2002)
            Previous studies have suggested that cardiac resynchronization achieved through atrial-synchronized biventricular pacing produces clinical benefits in patients with heart failure who have an intraventricular conduction delay. We conducted a double-blind trial to evaluate this therapeutic approach. Four hundred fifty-three patients with moderate-to-severe symptoms of heart failure associated with an ejection fraction of 35 percent or less and a QRS interval of 130 msec or more were randomly assigned to a cardiac-resynchronization group (228 patients) or to a control group (225 patients) for six months, while conventional therapy for heart failure was maintained. The primary end points were the New York Heart Association functional class, quality of life, and the distance walked in six minutes. As compared with the control group, patients assigned to cardiac resynchronization experienced an improvement in the distance walked in six minutes (+39 vs. +10 m, P=0.005), functional class (P<0.001), quality of life (-18.0 vs. -9.0 points, P= 0.001), time on the treadmill during exercise testing (+81 vs. +19 sec, P=0.001), and ejection fraction (+4.6 percent vs. -0.2 percent, P<0.001). In addition, fewer patients in the group assigned to cardiac resynchronization than control patients required hospitalization (8 percent vs. 15 percent) or intravenous medications (7 percent vs. 15 percent) for the treatment of heart failure (P<0.05 for both comparisons). Implantation of the device was unsuccessful in 8 percent of patients and was complicated by refractory hypotension, bradycardia, or asystole in four patients (two of whom died) and by perforation of the coronary sinus requiring pericardiocentesis in two others. Cardiac resynchronization results in significant clinical improvement in patients who have moderate-to-severe heart failure and an intraventricular conduction delay.
            Article 0 comments Cited 183 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Defining left bundle branch block in the era of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

              David Strauss, Ronald Selvester, Galen Wagner (2011)
              Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as an attractive intervention to improve left ventricular mechanical function by changing the sequence of electrical activation. Unfortunately, many patients receiving CRT do not benefit but are subjected to device complications and costs. Thus, there is a need for better selection criteria. Current criteria for CRT eligibility include a QRS duration ≥ 120 ms. However, QRS morphology is not considered, although it can indicate the cause of delayed conduction. Recent studies have suggested that only patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) benefit from CRT, and not patients with right bundle branch block or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay. The authors review the pathophysiologic and clinical evidence supporting why only patients with complete LBBB benefit from CRT. Furthermore, they review how the threshold of 120 ms to define LBBB was derived subjectively at a time when criteria for LBBB and right bundle branch block were mistakenly reversed. Three key studies over the past 65 years have suggested that 1/3 of patients diagnosed with LBBB by conventional electrocardiographic criteria may not have true complete LBBB, but likely have a combination of left ventricular hypertrophy and left anterior fascicular block. On the basis of additional insights from computer simulations, the investigators propose stricter criteria for complete LBBB that include a QRS duration ≥ 140 ms for men and ≥ 130 ms for women, along with mid-QRS notching or slurring in ≥ 2 contiguous leads. Further studies are needed to reinvestigate the electrocardiographic criteria for complete LBBB and the implications of these criteria for selecting patients for CRT. Published by Elsevier Inc.
              Article 0 comments Cited 149 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Charlotte Stephansen: (View ORCID Profile)
                Christian Gerdes: (View ORCID Profile)
                Henrik Kjærulf Jensen: (View ORCID Profile)
                Daniel Benjamin Fyenbo: (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Title: EP Europace
                Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
                ISSN (Print): 1099-5129
                ISSN (Electronic): 1532-2092
                Publication date Created: September 2019
                Publication date Created: September 01 2019
                Publication date Created: July 04 2019
                Publication date Other: September 2019
                Publication date (Print): September 01 2019
                Publication date (Electronic): July 04 2019
                Volume: 21
                Issue: 9
                Pages: 1369-1377
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Aarhus N, Denmark
                [2 ]Department of Nuclear Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Aarhus N, Denmark
                Article
                DOI: 10.1093/europace/euz184
                PubMed ID: 31274152
                SO-VID: 4455cf29-16de-4170-8cc7-dd89fa78dafa
                Copyright © © 2019
                License:

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article