Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Heart Rhythm. 2016 Aug;13(8):1644-51. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.05.015.

Optimization of left ventricular pacing site plus multipoint pacing improves remodeling and clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy at 1 year.

Author information

1
Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology Unit, Cardiology Department, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Rovigo, Italy. Electronic address: franc.zanon@iol.it.
2
Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology Unit, Cardiology Department, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Rovigo, Italy.
3
Cardiology Department, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Rovigo, Italy.
4
St. Jude Medical, Agrate Brianza, Italy.
5
St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, California.
6
Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
7
Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Approximately one-third of the patients with heart failure (HF) treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) fail to respond. Positioning the left ventricular (LV) pacing lead in the area of the latest electrical delay may improve the response to CRT. Multipoint pacing (MPP) of the LV has been shown to improve the acute hemodynamic response.

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that patients treated with MPP in whom LV pacing location is optimized have better long-term clinical outcomes than do patients treated with conventional CRT.

METHODS:

We evaluated the echocardiographic and clinical response of 110 patients with HF treated for nearly 1 year with either conventional CRT (standard [STD] group, n = 54, 49%), CRT with hemodynamic and electrical optimization of the LV pacing site (optimized [OPT] group, n = 36, 33%), or OPT combined with MPP (OPT + MPP group, n = 20, 18%). Responders were classified in terms of reduction in end-systolic volume index ≥15%, reduction in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class ≥1, and Packer score variation (NYHA response with no HF-related hospitalization events or death).

RESULTS:

In STD, OPT, and OPT + MPP groups, 56%, 72%, and 90% of patients, respectively, were end-systolic volume index responders (P = .004) and 67%, 78%, and 95% were NYHA class responders (P = .012); 59%, 67%, and 90% of patients exhibited a 1-year Packer score of 0 (P = .018). These trends remained significant after adjustment for confounding factors by multivariate logistic analysis.

CONCLUSION:

Combining MPP with optimal positioning of the LV lead on the basis of electrical delay and hemodynamics enhances reverse remodeling and improves clinical outcomes beyond the effect due to conventional CRT.

KEYWORDS:

Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Electrical delay; Heart failure; Hemodynamic response; Left ventricular pacing; Multipoint pacing

PMID:
27450156
DOI:
10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.05.015
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center