Key result
Nonsurgical withdrawal of the left ventricular lead successfully abolished diaphragmatic stimulation and restored left ventricular pacing in two cases.
Why the study?
Does nonsurgical withdrawal of the left ventricular lead abolish diaphragmatic stimulation and restore left ventricular pacing in patients with CRT complications?
Case Report (n=2)
Does nonsurgical withdrawal of the left ventricular lead abolish diaphragmatic stimulation and restore left ventricular pacing in patients with CRT complications?
Nonsurgical withdrawal of the LV lead may be an effective technique to resolve diaphragmatic stimulation and restore LV pacing in CRT patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
LV stimulation failure in CRT warrants vigilant follow-up; leaves open optimal prevention and management strategies.
In recent decades, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been established as a key tool for treating heart failure patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction and cardiac dyssynchrony. The failure of LV stimulation, which is associated with functional and prognostic worsening, is a potential complication of CRT, and may be due to different causes, including coronary sinus lead dislodgement or the presence of left phrenic nerve stimulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Castaneda et al. (2017) conducted a case report in Heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and cardiac dyssynchrony experiencing failure of LV stimulation (n=2). Nonsurgical withdrawal of the left ventricular lead was evaluated on Abolition of diaphragmatic stimulation and restoration of left ventricular pacing. Nonsurgical withdrawal of the left ventricular lead successfully abolished diaphragmatic stimulation and restored left ventricular pacing in two cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: