Why the study?
Does surgical epicardial left ventricular lead placement improve pacing thresholds and reduce complications compared to coronary sinus lead placement in patients with heart failure requiring biventricular pacing?
Population
86 patients with depressed systolic LV function, left bundle-branch-block and congestive heart failure NYHA…
Comparison
Surgical epicardial left ventricular lead… vs Coronary sinus (CS) lead placement (n=70).
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
mean 16.4+/-15.4 months
Authors
Loading...
Epicardial leads were associated with better thresholds and fewer complications; leaves open whether RCTs will confirm benefit or alter practice in HF.
Does surgical epicardial left ventricular lead placement improve pacing thresholds and reduce complications compared to coronary sinus lead placement in patients with heart failure requiring biventricular pacing?
Surgical epicardial lead placement for biventricular pacing offers superior long-term threshold capture and fewer lead-related complications compared to coronary sinus lead placement.
Mair et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: