Left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy: where and how?
Key result
Left ventricular lead placement and total scar burden are critical factors influencing the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy, as up to 30% of patients do not attain symptomatic benefit.
Population
Patients with refractory symptomatic chronic heart failure, severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction…
Design
Review
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Emphasizes scar-avoidant LV lead placement in CRT candidates; leaves open prospective validation of imaging-guided strategies.
Structured PICO
P
Population
Patients with refractory symptomatic chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association Class III or IV), severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF <35%), and LV dyssynchrony (QRS width >120 ms)
I
Intervention
Left ventricular lead placement strategies in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)
Optimal left ventricular lead placement, guided by the region of maximal dyssynchrony and avoidance of myocardial scar, is critical to maximizing patient response to cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Cite This Study
Khan et al. (2009) conducted a review in Chronic heart failure. Left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy was evaluated. Left ventricular lead placement and total scar burden are critical factors influencing the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy, as up to 30% of patients do not attain symptomatic benefit.