Why the study?
LV endocardial pacing is a promising CRT method, but short-term outcomes with the WiSE-CRT system in centers without prior implanting experience needed evaluation.
Does leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing with the WiSE-CRT system improve heart failure symptoms and echocardiographic parameters in patients requiring CRT?
Does leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing with the WiSE-CRT system improve heart failure symptoms and echocardiographic parameters in patients requiring CRT?
The WiSE-CRT leadless left ventricular pacing system can be successfully implanted by new operators and is associated with significant LV reverse remodeling and symptom improvement at 6 months.
High procedural success in inexperienced centers supports feasibility; leaves open long-term efficacy and comparative outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing is a promising method to deliver cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). WiSE-CRT is a wireless LV endocardial pacing system, and delivers ultrasonic energy to an LV electrode. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to present short-term outcomes with the WiSE-CRT system in centers with no prior implanting experience. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected from 19 centers where WiSE-CRT systems were implanted during the roll-in phase of the SOLVE-CRT trial. Patients were followed at 1, 3, and 6 months, including transthoracic echo (TTE) at 6 months. RESULTS: The WiSE-CRT was successfully implanted in all 31 attempted cases, and 30 patients completed the 6-month follow-up. One patient underwent heart transplantation 1 month after implantation, and was excluded. Fourteen (46.7%) patients demonstrated ≥1 NYHA class improvement. TTE data were available in 29 patients. LV ejection fraction, LV end-systolic volume, and LV end-diastolic volume improved from 28.3% ± 6.7% to 33.5% ± 6.9% (P < .001), 134.9 ± 51.3 mL to 111.1 ± 40.3 mL (P = .0004), and 185.4 ± 58.8 mL to 164.9 ± 50.6 mL (P = .0017), respectively. There were 3 (9.7%) device-related type 1 complications: 1 insufficient LV pacing, 1 embolization of an unanchored LV electrode, and 1 skin infection. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated a high success rate of LV endocardial electrode placement in centers with no prior implanting experience. Favorable clinical responses in heart failure symptoms and significant LV reverse remodeling were noted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Okabe et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: