Key result
Postoperative temporary bi-ventricular pacing did not significantly reduce the duration of 'Level 3' intensive care compared to conventional right ventricular pacing (40 vs 54 hours; P=0.43).
Why the study?
Does postoperative temporary bi-ventricular pacing reduce the duration of 'Level 3' intensive care in patients with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery?
RCT (n=38)
randomly assigned
Yes
Does postoperative temporary bi-ventricular pacing reduce the duration of 'Level 3' intensive care in patients with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 40% vs 54%
p-value: p=0.43
Optimized temporary bi-ventricular pacing improves postoperative haemodynamics in patients with severe LV dysfunction undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery, but does not significantly reduce the duration of intensive care.
Temporary biventricular pacing does not shorten Level 3 ICU stay after on-pump surgery in severe LV dysfunction; challenges routine adoption for this endpoint despite haemodynamic gains.
OBJECTIVES: Optimized temporary bi-ventricular (BiV) pacing may benefit heart failure patients after on-pump cardiac surgery compared with conventional dual-chamber right ventricular (RV) pacing. An improvement in haemodynamic function with BiV pacing may reduce the duration of 'Level 3' intensive care. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients in sinus rhythm, ejection fraction ≤35%, undergoing on-pump surgical revascularization, valve surgery or both were enrolled in this study. Before closing the sternum, temporary epicardial pacing wires were attached to the right atrium, RV outflow tract and basal posterolateral wall of the left ventricle. Patients were randomly assigned to postoperative BiV pacing with the optimization of the atrio- (AV) and inter-ventricular (VV) pacing intervals (Group 1) or conventional dual-chamber right AV pacing (Group 2). The primary end-point was the duration of 'Level 3' intensive care. Secondary end-points included cardiac output which was measured by thermodiluation at admission to the intensive care unit and at 6 and 18 h later, in five different pacing modes. RESULTS: The duration of 'Level 3' care was similar between groups (40 ± 35 vs 54 ± 63 h; Group 1 vs 2; P = 0.43). Cardiac output was similar in all pacing modes at baseline. At 18 h, cardiac output with BiV pacing (5.8 l/min) was 7% higher than atrial inhibited (5.4 l/min) and 9% higher than dual-chamber RV pacing (5.3 l/min; P = 0.02 and 0.001, respectively). Optimization of the VV interval produced a further 4% increase in cardiac output compared with baseline settings (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative haemodynamic function may be enhanced by temporary BiV pacing of high-risk patients after on-pump cardiac surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Russell et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction after on-pump cardiac surgery (n=38). Postoperative temporary bi-ventricular (BiV) pacing with optimization of AV and VV intervals vs. Conventional dual-chamber right AV pacing was evaluated on Duration of 'Level 3' intensive care (p=0.43). Postoperative temporary bi-ventricular pacing did not significantly reduce the duration of 'Level 3' intensive care compared to conventional right ventricular pacing (40 vs 54 hours; P=0.43).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: