Why the study?
Does electrically guided left ventricular lead placement improve change in LVEF, LV reverse remodelling and clinical response compared to imaging-guided placement in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy?
Does electrically guided left ventricular lead placement improve change in LVEF, LV reverse remodelling and clinical response compared to imaging-guided placement in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy?
Electrically guided LV lead placement during CRT implantation appears non-inferior to imaging-guided placement regarding LV reverse remodeling and clinical response.
Electrically guided CRT lead placement is a viable non-inferior alternative; extends options for optimizing implantation without routine imaging.
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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stephansen et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: