Key result
Left ventricular endocardial biventricular pacing more than doubled electrical resynchronization and increased the benefit on LVdP/dtmax and stroke work by 90% and 50% compared with epicardial pacing.
Why the study?
Does left ventricular endocardial pacing improve resynchronization therapy compared to conventional epicardial pacing in canine left bundle-branch hearts?
Population
8 anesthetized dogs with experimental left bundle-branch block
Comparison
Left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing (ENDO) vs Conventional epicardial (EPI) LV pacing
Design
Preclinical
Follow-up
acute
Authors
Loading...
Endocardial LV pacing merits clinical testing in CRT; hypothesis-generating from canine data, no practice change yet.
Does left ventricular endocardial pacing improve resynchronization therapy compared to conventional epicardial pacing in canine left bundle-branch hearts?
In a canine model of LBBB, endocardial LV pacing significantly improved electrical resynchronization and systolic pump function compared to conventional epicardial pacing.
Deursen et al. (2009) studied experimental left bundle-branch block (n=8). left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing (ENDO) vs. conventional epicardial (EPI) LV pacing was evaluated on Systolic LV pump function (LVdP/dtmax and stroke work), diastolic function, electrical activation and dispersion of repolarization. Left ventricular endocardial biventricular pacing more than doubled electrical resynchronization and increased the benefit on LVdP/dtmax and stroke work by 90% and 50% compared with epicardial pacing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: