Key result
MultiPoint pacing in CRT responders delivered greater LVESV improvement (8.3% decrease vs 10.3% increase) and LVEF increase (7.7% vs 1.8%) compared to continued bi-ventricular therapy.
Why the study?
MultiPoint pacing improves structural remodeling in heart failure, but data regarding its efficacy in CRT responder patients were scarce.
Does MultiPoint pacing improve LV reverse remodeling and quality of life in patients who are already responders to bi-ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy?
RCT (n=73)
Does MultiPoint pacing improve LV reverse remodeling and quality of life in patients who are already responders to bi-ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy?
Absolute Event Rate: 8.3% vs -10.3%
p-value: p=0.047
In patients who initially respond to standard CRT, switching to MultiPoint pacing with wide anatomical separation further improves LV reverse remodeling and quality of life.
Supports upgrade to MultiPoint pacing in CRT responders; extends BiV evidence with RCT data on incremental remodeling benefit.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy demonstrated benefits in heart failure. However, only 60-70% are responders and only 22% are super-responders. MultiPoint pacing (MPP) improves structural remodeling, but data in responder patients is scarce. METHODS: A prospective, randomized study of the efficacy of MPP was conducted in patients who were CRT responders after 6 months of bi-ventricular (BiV) therapy. At 6 months, responder patients (LV end-systolic volume [LVESV] reduction ≥15%) were randomized to either continued BiV therapy or to MPP programmed with wide anatomical separation ≥30 mm, and followed until 12 months. Efficacy was determined by 6-12 month changes in LVESV and LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Evaluations of super-responder rate (LVESV reduction ≥30%) and quality of life (NYHA, EQ-5D, MLHFQ) were also performed. RESULTS: From February 2017 to February 2019, 73 CRTs with Quartet LV leads were implanted (42.9% female, 65.7 ± 10.8 years old, 79.5% dilated cardiomyopathy). At 6 months, 74.2% responded to BiV and were randomized to BiV (n = 25) or MPP (n = 24). MPP versus BiV delivered greater LVESV improvement (8.3% decrease in MPP vs. 10.3% increase in BiV patients, p = .047), greater increase in LVEF (7.7% vs. 1.8%, p = .008), and higher 0-12 month super-responder rate (86.4% vs. 56.0%, p = .027). More MPP vs. BiV patients experienced an improvement in NYHA (84.6% vs. 50.0%, p = .047) and EQ-5D (94.4% vs. 54.0%, p = .006). CONCLUSIONS: MPP with wide anatomical spacing in CRT responder patients resulted in improved LV reverse remodeling with higher rates of super-responders, and better quality of life metrics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marques et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=73). MultiPoint pacing (MPP) vs. Continued bi-ventricular (BiV) therapy was evaluated on 6-12 month change in LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) (p=0.047). MultiPoint pacing in CRT responders delivered greater LVESV improvement (8.3% decrease vs 10.3% increase) and LVEF increase (7.7% vs 1.8%) compared to continued bi-ventricular therapy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: