Skip Navigation

Europace 2005 7(3):289; doi:10.1016/j.eupc.2005.02.106
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vogt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Horstkotte, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Vogt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Horstkotte, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2005 The European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

CP11: IS TAILORED LV ONLY PACING INFERIOR TO BIVENTRICULAR PACING IN CARDIAC RESYNCHRONIZATION THERAPY?

J. Vogt, B. Lamp, J. Heintze, L. Faber, B. Hansky, A. Häring and D. Horstkotte

Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Ruhr University Bochum Bad Oeynhausen, Germany

BACKGROUND: Thirty percent of the typical patient (P) cohort undergoing cardiacresynchronization therapy (CRT) do not improve clinically in large randomizedtrials. All P were treated with biventricular pacing mode (BI). This study reportson the clinical follow-up in patients resynchronized with tailored LV only pacing.

Methods: All P underwent preoperative hemodynamic testing with respect to pacing mode, AV delay and optimal pacing site. Response was defined as ≥10% pulsepressure (PP) increase. A difference of more than 3% PP increase between pacingmodes discriminated the best pacing mode.

RESULTS: Ninety-one (23 female 46 P with DCM, 36 with CAD, 9 with other diseases, QRS 185±29 ms, NYHA 3, EF 25±7,2%) of 500 P, who had undergone CRT at our center between 1999 and 2004, showed a significantly higher response in acute testing with the LV pacing mode. Seventy-eight P received a unipolar, 13 a bipolar LV lead. The mean stimulated AV delay was 154±28 ms. During 6- and 9-month follow-up P with tailored LV pacing mode improved highly significantly in quality of life, functional objectives and LVEDD that is LV remodeling (Table).Only 8 P died or were referred to heart transplant during two years of follow-up!

CONCLUSION: Despite historical pseudobipolar pacing in many P with unipolar LV lead tailored LV only pacing is significantly successful and superior to untailored BI pacing. Implantation of bipolar leads and careful tailoring of best chronic pacing mode is the clue to improve the success in CRT.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.