Key result
Dual-site left ventricular pacing offered no acute hemodynamic benefit over the best single pacing site (LVdP/dtmax 1,026 vs 1,053 mm Hg/s; P=0.005).
Why the study?
Does dual-site left ventricular pacing improve acute hemodynamics compared to single-site pacing in patients undergoing CRT-D implantation?
Does dual-site left ventricular pacing improve acute hemodynamics compared to single-site pacing in patients undergoing CRT-D implantation?
Dual-site left ventricular pacing using a dual cathodal coronary sinus lead with short electrode spacing offers no acute hemodynamic benefit over pacing from the single best site.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Dual-site LV pacing shows no acute hemodynamic benefit over optimal single-site; leaves open value of wider-spaced multipolar leads in CRT.
BACKGROUND: We studied the acute hemodynamic effect of left ventricular (LV) pacing from a dual cathodal coronary sinus (CS) lead in a both single- and dual-site electrode configuration. METHODS: In 17 patients who underwent implantation of a cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator system with dual cathodal CS leads, LV stimulation was performed from the distal and proximal electrode separately and from both electrodes simultaneously. The acute hemodynamic response was evaluated by invasive measurement of LVdP/dtmax. Timing of LV electrical activation time measured from onset QRS to LV sense during intrinsic rhythm at both electrodes were determined from simultaneous intracardiac recordings. The latter results were compared to those of an additional group of 26 patients in whom no hemodynamic effects were evaluated. RESULTS: Baseline LVdP/dtmax was 897 ± 222 mm Hg/s. Single-site LV pacing resulted in a rise of LVdP/dtmax to 1,053 ± 266 mm Hg/s (+17.4%) taking the best of the two sites and 1,020 ± 254 mm Hg (+13.7%) at the worst site (P = 0.0001). In the dual-site pacing configuration LVdP/dtmax was 1,026 ± 243 mm Hg/s (+14.1%). P value for single best versus dual site was 0.005, and for dual site versus worst single site was 0.18 (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Even with a relatively small distance of 20-21 mm between stimulation electrodes, there is a significant difference in acute hemodynamic effect from the single best and worst site. Dual-site LV pacing offers no hemodynamic benefit over the best single pacing site. The short electrode distance may have been a limitation and results may not be applicable to other forms of multisite pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gelder et al. (2015) studied Heart failure requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=43). Dual-site left ventricular pacing vs. Single-site left ventricular pacing was evaluated on Acute hemodynamic response (LVdP/dtmax in mm Hg/s) (p=0.005). Dual-site left ventricular pacing offered no acute hemodynamic benefit over the best single pacing site (LVdP/dtmax 1,026 vs 1,053 mm Hg/s; P=0.005).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: