Key result
LV anterolateral biventricular pacing linked to ~14% greater QRS reduction and higher dP/dt max versus posterolateral.
Why the study?
The preferred left ventricular lead position remains unclear in patients being upgraded from right ventricular apical pacing to CRT.
Does LV lead placement at the anterolateral site improve QRS duration and LV dP/dt max compared to the posterolateral site in patients upgraded from RV apical pacing to CRT?
Observational (n=37)
Does LV lead placement at the anterolateral site improve QRS duration and LV dP/dt max compared to the posterolateral site in patients upgraded from RV apical pacing to CRT?
Absolute Event Rate: 45.7% vs 32%
p-value: p=<.001
In patients upgraded from RV apical pacing to CRT, the LV anterolateral site provides superior electrical resynchronization and acute hemodynamic improvement compared to the posterolateral site.
Anterolateral LV lead placement may improve acute resynchronization in CRT upgrades; leaves open optimal site selection for clinical outcomes.
Introduction Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is well‐established for treating symptomatic heart failure with electrical dyssynchrony. The left ventricular (LV) lead position is recommended at LV posterolateral to lateral sites in patients with left bundle branch block; however, its preferred region remains unclear in patients being upgraded from right ventricular (RV) apical pacing to CRT. This study aimed to identify the preferred LV lead position for upgrading conventional RV apical pacing to CRT. Methods We used electrode catheters positioned at the RV apex and LV anterolateral and posterolateral sites via the coronary sinus (CS) branches to measure the ratio of activation time to QRS duration from the RV apex to the LV anterolateral and posterolateral sites during RV apical pacing. Simultaneous biventricular pacing was performed at the RV apex and each LV site, and the differences in QRS duration and LV dP/dt max from those of RV apical pacing were measured. Results Thirty‐seven patients with anterolateral and posterolateral LV CS branches were included. During RV apical pacing, the average ratio of activation time to QRS duration was higher at the LV anterolateral site than at the LV posterolateral site (0.90 ± 0.06 vs. 0.71 ± 0.11, p < .001). The decreasing ratio of QRS duration and the increasing ratio of LV dP/dt max were higher at the LV anterolateral site than at the posterolateral site (45.7 ± 18.0% vs. 32.0 ± 17.6%, p < .001; 12.7 ± 2.9% vs. 3.7 ± 8.2%, p < .001, respectively) during biventricular pacing compared with RV apical pacing. Conclusion The LV anterolateral site is the preferred LV lead position in patients being upgraded from conventional RV apical pacing to CRT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ogano et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Patients being upgraded from right ventricular apical pacing to CRT (n=37). Biventricular pacing at LV anterolateral site vs. Biventricular pacing at LV posterolateral site was evaluated on Decreasing ratio of QRS duration during biventricular pacing compared with RV apical pacing (p=<.001). Biventricular pacing at the LV anterolateral site resulted in a greater decrease in QRS duration (45.7% vs 32.0%, p<.001) and increase in LV dP/dt max compared to the posterolateral site.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: