Key result
Biventricular pacing significantly reduced hyperemic microvascular resistance compared to control pacing in the LAD (1.54 vs 1.76, P<0.001) and LCx (1.73 vs 1.92, P=0.003).
Why the study?
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy reduce coronary microvascular resistance and improve LV reverse remodelling in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy?
Population
22 patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy
Comparison
Cardiac resynchronization therapy with… vs Control pacing mode
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 months
Authors
Loading...
Acute microvascular effects may predict remodelling in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective trials.
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy reduce coronary microvascular resistance and improve LV reverse remodelling in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.54% vs 1.76%
p-value: p=<0.001
Cardiac resynchronization therapy acutely reduces coronary microvascular resistance, which correlates with subsequent left ventricular reverse remodelling at 6 months in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy.
Itoh et al. (2015) studied non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (n=22). Biventricular pacing (BiV) vs. Control pacing (atrial or sequential atrial and right ventricular pacing) was evaluated on Hyperemic microvascular resistance in the left anterior descending coronary artery (p=<0.001). Biventricular pacing significantly reduced hyperemic microvascular resistance compared to control pacing in the LAD (1.54 vs 1.76, P<0.001) and LCx (1.73 vs 1.92, P=0.003).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: