scholarly journals Optimal CRT Implantation—Where and How To Place the Left-Ventricular Lead?

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 329-344
Author(s):  
Christian Butter ◽  
Christian Georgi ◽  
Martin Stockburger
Keyword(s):  
Biventricular Pacing ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Optimal Placement ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Target Area ◽  
Lead Placement ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Ventricular Lead ◽  
Procedural Success ◽  
Endocardial Pacing

Abstract Purpose of Review Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) represents a well-established and effective non-pharmaceutical heart failure (HF) treatment in selected patients. Still, a significant number of patients remain CRT non-responders. An optimal placement of the left ventricular (LV) lead appears crucial for the intended hemodynamic and hence clinical improvement. A well-localized target area and tools that help to achieve successful lead implantation seem to be of utmost importance to reach an optimal CRT effect. Recent Findings Recent studies suggest previous multimodal imaging (CT/cMRI/ECG torso) to guide intraprocedural LV lead placement. Relevant benefit compared to empirical lead optimization is still a matter of debate. Technical improvements in leads and algorithms (e.g., multipoint pacing (MPP), adaptive algorithms) promise higher procedural success. Recently emerging alternatives for ventricular synchronization such as conduction system pacing (CSP), LV endocardial pacing, or leadless pacing challenge classical biventricular pacing. Summary This article reviews current strategies for a successful planning, implementation, and validation of the optimal CRT implantation. Pre-implant imaging modalities offer promising assistance for complex cases; empirical lead positioning and intraoperative testing remain the cornerstone in most cases and ensure a successful CRT effect.

Optimisation of Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy with MultiPoint™ Pacing

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Antonio Curnis ◽  
David O’Donnell ◽  
Axel Kloppe ◽  
Žarko Calovic ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systolic Function ◽  
Biventricular Pacing ◽  
Heart Rhythm ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Optimal Placement ◽  
Jude Medical ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronisation ◽  
Resynchronisation Therapy

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) using biventricular pacing is an established therapy for impairment of left ventricular (LV) systolic function in patients with heart failure (HF). Although technological advances have improved outcomes in patients undergoing biventricular pacing, the optimal placement of pacing leads remains challenging, and approximately one third of patients have no response to CRT. This may be due to patient selection and lead placement. Electrical mapping can greatly improve outcomes in CRT and increase the number of patients who derive benefit from the procedure. MultiPoint™ pacing (St Jude Medical, St Paul, MN, US) using a quadripolar lead increases the possibility of finding the best pacing site. In clinical studies, use of MultiPoint pacing in HF patients undergoing CRT has been associated with haemodynamic and clinical benefits compared with conventional biventricular pacing, and these benefits have been sustained at 12 months. This article describes the proceedings of a satellite symposium held at the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Europace conference held in Milan, Italy, in June 2015.

P536Reverse remodeling after cardiac resynchronization therapy is associated with improvement of contractile asymmetry in the area of left ventricular lead position

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Zaremba ◽  
B Tayal ◽  
A M Thogersen ◽  
S Riahi ◽  
P Sogaard
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Spline Interpolation ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Reverse Remodeling ◽  
Lead Target ◽  
Target Area ◽  
Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Lead Position ◽  
Ventricular Lead

Abstract Background One third of patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) do not respond to the treatment, possibly due to suboptimal lead position and persistent dyssynchronous left ventricular (LV) contraction. Purpose To assess the influence of LV lead position on improvement of contractile asymmetry and its significance for LV reverse remodeling after CRT. Methods Patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block undergoing CRT implantation were studied retrospectively. Assessment of mechanical delay within the LV was assessed using a recently developed index of contractile asymmetry (ICA). ICA was calculated as standard deviation of differences in systolic strain rate in the opposing LV walls derived from curved anatomical M-mode plots. LV was divided into 12 equally sized 30-degree sectors. Spline interpolation was used to estimate ICA in six opposing sector pairs permitting quantification of regional contractile asymmetry in the entire LV. Position of LV lead tip was assessed by thoracic computed tomography (CT). Response to CRT was defined as a reduction of LV end-systolic volume (ESV) ≥15% after 6 months. Results Study population (n= 26) consisted of 65.4% males, 68 ± 10 years, ischemic etiology in 42.3%, LV ejection fraction 24.1 ± 5.8%, QRS duration 171 ± 22 ms. CRT response was present in 18 (69.2%) patients. Pre-implantation ICA in the LV sector containing LV lead was 0.75 ± 0.24 s-1 in responders vs. 0.46 ± 0.16 s-1 in non-responders (p = 0.003). Reduction of ICA in the LV sector with LV lead was directly correlated with reduction of LV ESV after CRT (r = 0.46, p = 0.02) (Figure 1). ICA reduction in the LV sector with LV lead was -0.24 ± 0.28 s-1 in responders and -0.05 ± 0.16 s-1 in non-responders (p = 0.03). Meanwhile, reduction of ICA in the LV sectors located 60 degrees clockwise and 60 degrees counterclockwise away from the LV sector with LV lead (remote LV sectors) did not differ significantly between responders and non-responders: -0.12 ± 0.15 s-1 vs. -0.06 ± 0.1 s-1 (p = 0.28). Likewise, no significant correlation between reduction of ICA in remote LV sectors and LV ESV reduction was observed (p = 0.11). Conclusion Pre-implantation contractile asymmetry in the LV lead target area is associated with a positive response to CRT. Simultaneously, the degree of LV reverse remodeling after CRT seems to correlate with the magnitude of improvement of contractile asymmetry specifically in the region of LV lead location. Abstract Figure 1

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document