Why the study?
Evaluation of conduction intervals to predict the success of resynchronization in BiVP or CSP is not widespread in clinical practice.
Does guiding cardiac resynchronization therapy by interventricular conduction delays improve CRT response and narrow paced QRS?
Does guiding cardiac resynchronization therapy by interventricular conduction delays improve CRT response and narrow paced QRS?
Tailoring the CRT approach (BiVP vs CSP) based on intraoperative interventricular conduction delays may optimize QRS narrowing and clinical response.
IVCD-guided CRT may refine resynchronization in select cases; hypothesis-generating and leaves open prospective validation.
Evaluation of conduction intervals to predict success of resynchronization in biventricular pacing(BiVP) or Conduction System Pacing(CSP) is not spread in clinical practice. A right ventricle-to-left ventricle intrinsic conduction interval (RVs-LVs) > 70 ms or prolonged RVpaced - LVs(RVp-LVs)interval can predict Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT)response.This paper describes a case of cardiac resynchronization guided by spontaneous and paced interventricular conduction delays (IVCD) obtained in BiVP that led to changing intraoperative approach. A strategy for cardiac resynchronization based on the CSP/BiVP approach according to the IVCD could represent a viable and reliable solution to obtain a narrow paced QRS and to improve the CRT response.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santoro et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: