Key result
This review discusses strategies to maximize the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy and whether advances in device programming can increase the number of true responders.
Why the study?
Can advances in programming of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices increase the number of true responders in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure?
Can advances in programming of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices increase the number of true responders in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure?
This review discusses strategies, including device programming advances, to maximize the benefit of biventricular pacing and reduce the nonresponder rate in cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Does not yet support routine advanced CRT programming; leaves open whether individualized approaches can increase true responders.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy is now considered a standard therapy for patients with cardiomyopathy, heart failure, and interventricular conduction delay. Despite the demonstrated benefits in multiple large-scale trials, there is a clear nonresponder rate. This brief review will address some of the issues associated with maximizing the benefit of biventricular pacing, and whether or not advances in programming of such devices will increase the number of true responders.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rahul N. Doshi (2005) conducted a review in Cardiomyopathy, heart failure, and interventricular conduction delay. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (biventricular pacing) was evaluated. This review discusses strategies to maximize the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy and whether advances in device programming can increase the number of true responders.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: