Key result
Acoustic cardiography for atrioventricular delay optimization in CRT devices strongly correlated with echocardiography (r=0.90, P<0.001) and required less time.
Why the study?
Does acoustic cardiography provide comparable atrioventricular delay optimization to echocardiography in patients with implanted CRT devices?
Cross-Sectional (n=22)
Does acoustic cardiography provide comparable atrioventricular delay optimization to echocardiography in patients with implanted CRT devices?
Effect estimate: r=0.90
p-value: p=<0.001
Acoustic cardiography provides comparable atrioventricular delay optimization to echocardiography in CRT patients, while being faster and easier to interpret.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May reduce optimization time in CRT; cross-sectional correlation leaves open randomized confirmation of outcomes.
Hasan et al. (2006) conducted a cross-sectional in Implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices (n=22). Acoustic cardiography vs. Echocardiography (Doppler transmitral flow) was evaluated on Recommended atrioventricular delay settings (r=0.90, p=<0.001). Acoustic cardiography for atrioventricular delay optimization in CRT devices strongly correlated with echocardiography (r=0.90, P<0.001) and required less time.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: