Key result
Selecting patients for cardiac resynchronization therapy using at least two echocardiographic parameters of myocardial asynchrony improved the responder rate to 81.2% compared to 47.4% in controls.
Why the study?
Does echocardiographic screening for myocardial asynchrony using multiple parameters improve the hemodynamic response rate to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with chronic heart failure?
Cohort (n=54)
No
Does echocardiographic screening for myocardial asynchrony using multiple parameters improve the hemodynamic response rate to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with chronic heart failure?
Selecting heart failure patients for CRT based on the presence of multiple echocardiographic parameters of myocardial asynchrony significantly improves the rate of reverse remodeling compared to standard selection criteria.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May enhance CRT responder rates in heart failure; leaves open whether multi-parameter echo selection should guide practice without randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization Therapy (CRT) is an effective therapy for chronic heart failure with beneficial hemodynamic effects leading to a reduction of morbidity and mortality. The responder rates, however, are low. There are various and contentious echocardiographic parameters of myocardial asynchrony. Patient selection by echocardiographic assessment of asynchrony is thought to improve responder rates. METHODS: In this small single-center pilot-study, seven established parameters of myocardial asynchrony were used to select patients for CRT: (1) interventricular electromechanical delay (IMD, cut-off > or = 40 ms), (2) Septal-to-posterior wall motion delay (SPWMD, > or = 130 ms), (3) maximal difference in time-to-peak velocities between any two of twelve LV segments (Ts-12 > or = 104 ms), (4) standard deviation of time to peak myocardial velocities (Ts-12-SD, > or = 34.4 ms), (5) difference between the septal and basal time-to-peak velocity (TDId, > or = 60 ms), (6) left ventricular electromechanical delay (LVEMD, > 140 ms) and (7) delayed longitudinal contraction (DLC, > 2 segments).16 chronic heart failure patients (NYHA III-IV, LVEF < 0.35, QRS > or = 120 ms) at least two out of seven parameters of myocardial asynchrony received cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-ICD). Follow-up echo examination was after 6 months. The control group was a historic group of CRT patients (n = 38) who had not been screened for echocardiographic signs of myocardial asynchrony prior to device implantation. RESULTS: Based on reverse remodeling (relative reduction of LVESV > 15%, relative increase of LVEF > 25%), the responder rate to CRT was 81.2% in patients selected for CRT according to our protocol as compared to 47.4% in the control group (p = 0.04). At baseline, there were on average 4.1 +/- 1.6 positive parameters of asynchrony (follow-up: 3.7 [+/- 1.6] parameters positive, p = 0.52). Only the LVEMD decreased significantly after CRT (p = 0.027). The remaining parameters showed a non-significant trend towards reduction of myocardial asynchrony. CONCLUSION: The implementation of different markers of asynchrony in the selection process for CRT improves the hemodynamic response rate to CRT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Knebel et al. (2008) conducted a cohort in Chronic heart failure (n=54). Echocardiography-guided patient selection for CRT vs. Historic control group (CRT without echo-guided selection) was evaluated on Responder rate to CRT (relative reduction of LVESV > 15% and relative increase of LVEF > 25%) (p=0.04). Selecting patients for cardiac resynchronization therapy using at least two echocardiographic parameters of myocardial asynchrony improved the responder rate to 81.2% compared to 47.4% in controls.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: