Key result
Echocardiographic-guided pacemaker optimization in CRT nonresponders resulted in similar 3.5-year survival compared to nonoptimized patients (58% vs 58%, P=0.973).
Why the study?
Does ECHO-guided pacemaker optimization to LV pacing improve LV hemodynamics and clinical outcomes in CRT nonresponders compared to BiV pacing?
Cohort (n=112)
Does ECHO-guided pacemaker optimization to LV pacing improve LV hemodynamics and clinical outcomes in CRT nonresponders compared to BiV pacing?
ECHO-guided pacemaker optimization to LV or BiV pacing in CRT nonresponders improves LV systolic function and dyssynchrony, yielding survival rates similar to CRT responders not referred for optimization.
Similar survival after echocardiographic optimization in CRT nonresponders should not yet change practice; leaves open hemodynamic or symptomatic effects.
BACKGROUND: Echocardiographic (ECHO)-guided pacemaker optimization (PMO) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) nonresponders acutely improves left ventricular (LV) function. However, the chronic results of LV pacing in this group are less understood. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 28 CRT nonresponders optimized based on ECHO to LV pacing and compared them to 28 age- and gender-matched patients optimized to biventricular (BiV) pacing. ECHOs with tissue Doppler imaging assessed LV hemodynamics before, immediately after, and 29 ± 16 months after PMO. Also, 56 age- and gender-matched CRT responders were included for comparison of clinical outcomes. RESULTS: PMO resulted in acute improvements in longitudinal LV systolic function and several measures of dyssynchrony, with greater improvements in the LV paced group. Chronic improvements in ejection fraction (EF) (3.2 ± 7.7%), and left ventricle end-systolic volume (LVESV) (-11 ± 36 mL) and one dyssynchrony measure were seen in the combined group. Chronically, both LV and BiV paced patients improved some measures of systolic function and dyssynchrony although response varied between the groups. Survival at 3.5 years was similar (P = 0.973) between the PMO (58%) and nonoptimized groups (58%) but survival free of cardiovascular hospitalization was significantly (P = 0.037) better in the nonoptimized group. CONCLUSIONS: CRT nonresponders undergoing PMO to either LV or BiV pacing have acute improvements in longitudinal systolic function and some measures of dyssynchrony. Some benefits are sustained chronically, with improvements in EF, LVESV, and dyssynchrony. A strategy of ECHO-guided PMO results in survival for CRT nonresponders similar to that of CRT patients not referred for PMO.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gage et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) nonresponders (n=112). Echocardiographic-guided pacemaker optimization (PMO) vs. Nonoptimized CRT patients was evaluated on Survival at 3.5 years (p=0.973). Echocardiographic-guided pacemaker optimization in CRT nonresponders resulted in similar 3.5-year survival compared to nonoptimized patients (58% vs 58%, P=0.973).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: