Why the study?
Leadless endocardial LV pacing resynchronization therapy is a novel solution for HF patients in whom conventional CRT failed, but its clinical effectiveness needed synthesis.
Does WiSE CRT improve ejection fraction and QRS duration in heart failure patients who failed conventional CRT?
Meta-Analysis (n=175)
Does WiSE CRT improve ejection fraction and QRS duration in heart failure patients who failed conventional CRT?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Leadless endocardial LV pacing (WiSE CRT) significantly improves LVEF and QRS duration, serving as a viable rescue therapy for HF patients failing conventional CRT.
Background Leadless endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing resynchronization therapy is a novel solution for patients with heart failure (HF) in whom conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) failed. Methods PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant cohort studies. Clinical outcomes of interest such as ejection fraction (EF), QRS duration (QRSd), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) were extracted and analyzed. Results Five studies involving 175 HF patients for WiSE CRT were included, and patients were followed-up for 6 months. The implanted success rate ranged from 76.5 to 100%. WiSE CRT resulted in significantly narrower QRSd [mean difference (MD): −38.21 ms, 95% confidence interval (CI): −44.36 to −32.07, p < 0.001], improved left ventricular ejection fraction (MD: 6.07%, 95% CI: 4.43 to 7.71, I2 = 0%, p < 0.001), reduced left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD: −23.47 ml, 95% CI: −37.18 to −9.13, p < 0.001), and reduced left ventricular end-diastolic volume (MD: −24.02 ml, 95% CI: −37.01 to −11.03, p = 0.02). Conclusion Evidence from current studies suggests that leadless endocardial LV pacing resynchronization is effective for HF patients who failed conventional CRT or needed a device upgrade, and it may be an interesting rescue therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cang et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=175). WiSE CRT vs. Baseline was evaluated on QRS duration (MD -38.21 ms, 95% CI -44.36 to -32.07, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: