Key result
Biventricular pacing immediately after cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with low EF significantly increased fractional area of change to 44% compared to 36% with right ventricular pacing (p<0.01).
Why the study?
Does temporary biventricular pacing improve hemodynamics and LV function compared to single ventricle pacing in patients with reduced EF post-cardiopulmonary bypass?
RCT (n=10)
Randomly allocated sequence
Does temporary biventricular pacing improve hemodynamics and LV function compared to single ventricle pacing in patients with reduced EF post-cardiopulmonary bypass?
Absolute Event Rate: 44% vs 36%
p-value: p=< 0.01
Temporary biventricular pacing immediately after cardiopulmonary bypass improves LV systolic and diastolic function compared to single ventricle pacing in patients with reduced EF.
Supports temporary BiV pacing post-CPB in low-EF patients to optimize LV function; extends resynchronization evidence to acute surgical settings.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Patients with low ejection fraction (EF) undergoing myocardial revascularization frequently require ventricular pacing following cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). While the benefits of chronic biventricular (BiV) pacing in patients with low EF are well established, there are little data on acute effects during heart surgery. This study analyzed the response of BiV versus single ventricle lead pacing on hemodynamics and left ventricular (LV) function immediately following CPB. METHODS: Ten patients with decreased LV EF (mean = 35 +/- 6%) underwent open-heart surgery with CPB. Temporary pacing electrodes were placed on the right atrium, apex of the right ventricle, and lateral wall of the LV after separation from CPB. The hemodynamic effects of three atrio-ventricular (right, left, and BiV) pacing modes were studied for four minutes each. The pacing sequence was randomly allocated with a resting period of three minutes between each mode. Hemodynamic and echocardiographic data of LV function were collected. Statistical analysis was performed with analysis of variance. RESULTS: BiV pacing increased cardiac output by 4%, 13%, and 44% over right ventricular pacing, LV pacing, and pre-bypass values, respectively. The fractional area of change increased significantly with BiV pacing compared to right ventricular and LV pacing (36%, 35% to 44%, p < 0.01). An increased propagation velocity of 49 cm/s compared to 38 cm/s and 40 cm/s for right ventricular and LV pacing, respectively, suggested an improvement in diastolic function. CONCLUSION: In patients with low EF, BiV pacing immediately after CPB significantly improves LV systolic function and cardiac output, and suggests significantly improved diastolic function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Muehlschlegel et al. (2008) conducted an RCT in Decreased left ventricular ejection fraction undergoing open-heart surgery (n=10). Biventricular pacing vs. Right ventricular pacing and left ventricular pacing was evaluated on Fractional area of change (p=< 0.01). Biventricular pacing immediately after cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with low EF significantly increased fractional area of change to 44% compared to 36% with right ventricular pacing (p<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: