Key result
IEGM-based CRT optimization cuts time ~89% vs echocardiography and improves LVEF and LVOT VTI.
Why the study?
To evaluate the performance of echocardiography-based programming compared with the intracardiac electrocardiogram-based method for cardiac resynchronization therapy optimization.
Does intracardiac electrocardiogram (IEGM)-based optimization improve outcomes and reduce optimization time compared to echocardiography-based optimization in patients receiving CRT?
Systematic Review (n=919)
Does intracardiac electrocardiogram (IEGM)-based optimization improve outcomes and reduce optimization time compared to echocardiography-based optimization in patients receiving CRT?
Absolute Event Rate: 6.65% vs 60.15%
IEGM-based CRT optimization is a faster alternative to echocardiography-based optimization that yields comparable or superior improvements in LVEF, NYHA class, and exercise capacity.
IEGM optimization cuts CRT time to ~7 vs 60 min while improving LVEF; supports adoption over echocardiography in practice and trials.
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the performance of echocardiography-based programming in comparison with the intracardiac electrocardiogram (IEGM)-based method for the optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: A literature review was conducted using digital databases to systematically identify the studies reporting CRT optimization through echocardiography compared with IEGM. Detailed patient-level study characteristics including the type of study, sample size, therapy, the New York Heart Classification (NYHA) status, lead placement, and other parameters were abstracted. Finally, postprogramming outcomes were extracted for each article. RESULTS: In a total of 11 studies, 919 patients were recruited for the final analysis. Overall, 692 (75.29%) were males. The mean duration of the QRS complex in our study population ranged from 145.2 ± 21.8 ms to 183 ± 19.9 ms. There was an equal improvement in the NYHA class between the two methods while the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) demonstrated an improvement by IEGM. Many studies supported IEGM to increase the 6-minute walk test and left ventricular outflow tract velocity time interval (LVOT VTI) when compared to echocardiography. The mean time for echocardiography-based optimization was 60.15 min while that of IEGM-based optimization was 6.65 min. CONCLUSION: IEGM is an alternative method for CRT optimization in improving the NYHA class, LVEF, and LVOT VTI, and is less time-consuming when compared to the echocardiography-based methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sami et al. (2023) conducted a systematic review in Cardiac resynchronization therapy optimization (n=919). Intracardiac electrocardiogram (IEGM)-based optimization vs. Echocardiography-based optimization was evaluated on Mean optimization time (minutes). Intracardiac electrocardiogram (IEGM)-based optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy was less time-consuming than echocardiography (6.65 vs 60.15 min) and improved LVEF and LVOT VTI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: