Key result
Biventricular endocardial pacing was superior to biventricular epicardial and triventricular pacing in increasing acute hemodynamic response in a canine model of heart failure (P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does biventricular endocardial pacing improve acute hemodynamic response compared to epicardial or triventricular pacing in a canine model of ischemic heart failure?
Does biventricular endocardial pacing improve acute hemodynamic response compared to epicardial or triventricular pacing in a canine model of ischemic heart failure?
p-value: p=<0.01
In a canine model of ischemic heart failure, biventricular endocardial pacing provided superior acute hemodynamic improvement compared to epicardial or triventricular pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Warrants clinical trials of endocardial pacing in HF; extends preclinical comparisons but remains hypothesis-generating.
Bordachar et al. (2012) studied Ischemic heart failure (canine model) (n=8). Biventricular (BiV) endocardial pacing vs. BiV epicardial and Triventricular (TriV) pacing was evaluated on Acute hemodynamic response (LVdP/dt(max)) (p=<0.01). Biventricular endocardial pacing was superior to biventricular epicardial and triventricular pacing in increasing acute hemodynamic response in a canine model of heart failure (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: