Key result
Triangle ventricular pacing acutely improves peak dP/dt, cardiac output, and dyssynchrony vs standard Bi-V pacing.
Why the study?
This study examined the impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy by triangle ventricular pacing on left ventricular function and dyssynchrony compared with conventional bi-ventricular pacing.
Does triangle ventricular pacing improve haemodynamics and dyssynchrony compared to conventional bi-ventricular pacing in patients with advanced heart failure?
Does triangle ventricular pacing improve haemodynamics and dyssynchrony compared to conventional bi-ventricular pacing in patients with advanced heart failure?
Triangle ventricular pacing provides greater acute improvements in left ventricular haemodynamics and dyssynchrony compared to conventional bi-ventricular pacing in patients with advanced heart failure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Tri-V pacing may improve LV function in advanced HF; leaves open superiority to standard CRT pending randomized trials.
AIMS: This study examined the impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) by triangle ventricular pacing (Tri-V) on left ventricular (LV) function and dyssynchrony. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-one patients with NYHA class III or IV heart failure were studied. For Tri-V, two right ventricular (RV) leads were connected to the CRT device via a Y-connector with one lead anchored at the RV apex and the other at the RV outflow tract. The LV lead was positioned in the posterolateral or lateral cardiac vein. CRT with standard bi-ventricular pacing (Bi-V) was performed with the RV apical and LV leads. LV function was assessed by the measurement of LV positive dp/dt (dP/dt(max)) and cardiac output (CO). LV dyssynchrony was assessed using the standard deviation of the time to peak myocardial velocity during the systolic phase in 12 LV segments (Ts-SD) derived from tissue Doppler images. In comparison to Bi-V, Tri-V increased dP/dt(max) (baseline, 746 +/- 165; Bi-V, 909 +/- 186; Tri-V, 959 +/- 195 mmHg/s, P = 0.04) and CO (baseline, 3.1 +/- 1.0; Bi-V, 3.4 +/- 1.1; Tri-V, 3.8 +/- 1.2 L/min, P < 0.001), decreased Ts-SD (baseline, 54.0 +/- 35.0; Bi-V, 33.6 +/- 15.3; Tri-V, 22.4 +/- 8.1 ms, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The acute beneficial effects of Tri-V on LV function and dyssynchrony were greater than those of Bi-V.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoshida et al. (2007) studied advanced heart failure (n=21). Triangle ventricular pacing (Tri-V) vs. Standard bi-ventricular pacing (Bi-V) was evaluated on LV positive dp/dt (dP/dt(max)) (p=0.04). Triangle ventricular pacing acutely improved dP/dt(max) (959 vs 909 mmHg/s, P=0.04), cardiac output (P<0.001), and dyssynchrony (P=0.02) compared to standard bi-ventricular pacing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: