January 1, 2001Cardiology
Impact of Acute Biventricular Pacing on Left Ventricular Performance and Volumes in Patients with Severe Heart Failure
Key result
Acute biventricular pacing significantly improved the extent of contracting myocardium in synchrony by 15.4% (p<0.05) and increased ejection fraction by 22.8% (p<0.01) compared to sinus rhythm.
Why the study?
Does acute biventricular pacing improve left ventricular performance and volumes in patients with severe heart failure and bundle branch block?
Population
25 consecutive patients with severe heart failure and bundle branch block
Comparison
Acute biventricular pacing vs Sinus rhythm (baseline)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
acute (short-term)
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
May inform acute management in severe HF; leaves open randomized confirmation of outcomes.
Study Design
Type
Observational (n=25)
Structured PICO
Does acute biventricular pacing improve left ventricular performance and volumes in patients with severe heart failure and bundle branch block?
P
Population
25 consecutive patients with severe heart failure and bundle branch block
I
Intervention
Acute biventricular pacing
C
Comparator
Sinus rhythm (baseline)
O
Outcome
Left ventricular performance and volumes (extent of contracting myocardium in synchrony, duration of contraction synchrony, end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes, ejection fraction)surrogate
Main Result
p-value: p=< 0.05
Acute biventricular pacing improves left ventricular systolic performance and reduces volumes in patients with severe heart failure, with tissue velocity imaging helping to predict pacing efficacy.
Cite This Study
Søgaard et al. (2001) conducted an observational in Severe heart failure and bundle branch block (n=25). Acute biventricular pacing vs. Sinus rhythm (baseline) was evaluated on Extent of contracting myocardium in synchrony (p=< 0.05). Acute biventricular pacing significantly improved the extent of contracting myocardium in synchrony by 15.4% (p<0.05) and increased ejection fraction by 22.8% (p<0.01) compared to sinus rhythm.