Key result
Strict left bundle branch block classification correlated with ventricular electrical delay (R=0.613), but 34% of non-SLBBB patients were potential CRT responders according to VED and QRS area.
Why the study?
About 30% of patients meeting current CRT criteria do not benefit, and three ECG predictors of CRT benefit (SLBBB, QRS area, and VED) had never been analyzed concurrently.
Do QRS area and ventricular electrical delay (VED) correlate with strict left bundle branch block (SLBBB) classification in predicting cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit?
Observational (n=602)
Do QRS area and ventricular electrical delay (VED) correlate with strict left bundle branch block (SLBBB) classification in predicting cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit?
Effect estimate: R 0.613
QRS area and ventricular electrical delay (VED) identify a significant proportion of non-strict LBBB patients who may benefit from CRT, suggesting strict LBBB criteria may be too exclusionary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Strict LBBB criteria may miss potential CRT responders by VED and QRS area; leaves open whether these metrics refine selection in trials.
Halámek et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Left bundle branch block (LBBB) (n=602). Strict left bundle branch block (SLBBB) classification vs. Ventricular electrical delay (VED) and QRS area was evaluated on Correlation between SLBBB classification and ventricular electrical delay (VED) (R 0.613). Strict left bundle branch block classification correlated with ventricular electrical delay (R=0.613), but 34% of non-SLBBB patients were potential CRT responders according to VED and QRS area.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: