Key result
Biventricular pacing significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (46% vs 39%) and reduced LV volumes compared to right ventricular pacing in patients with mild cardiomyopathy.
Why the study?
Does biventricular pacing improve LV function, remodelling, and clinical status in chronically right ventricular paced patients with mild cardiomyopathy?
RCT (n=36)
Single-blind
Randomized crossover
Does biventricular pacing improve LV function, remodelling, and clinical status in chronically right ventricular paced patients with mild cardiomyopathy?
Absolute Event Rate: 46% vs 39%
Upgrading to biventricular pacing in chronically RV-paced patients with mild cardiomyopathy significantly improves LV function and reverses remodelling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports upgrading chronically RV-paced patients with mild cardiomyopathy to biventricular pacing; extends randomized evidence beyond severe systolic dysfunction.
Geldorp et al. (2009) conducted an RCT in Mild cardiomyopathy with chronic right ventricular pacing (n=36). Biventricular (BiV) pacing vs. Right ventricular (RV) pacing was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Biventricular pacing significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (46% vs 39%) and reduced LV volumes compared to right ventricular pacing in patients with mild cardiomyopathy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: