Key result
Transapical endocardial LV pacing is linked to a ~10% increase in EF and improved functional status.
Why the study?
Failure of coronary sinus lead implantation for cardiac resynchronization therapy requires alternative approaches, and the feasibility of a transapical implantation technique was evaluated.
Does transapical endocardial left ventricular pacing lead implantation improve LV function and clinical status in patients with failed coronary sinus lead implantation?
Comparison
Transapical endocardial LV pacing lead implantation via minithoracotomy vs percutaneous approach
Design
Multicentre observational case series
Authors
Loading...
May support transapical LV pacing after failed CS implantation; hypothesis-generating pending prospective trials.
Observational (n=20)
Yes
Does transapical endocardial left ventricular pacing lead implantation improve LV function and clinical status in patients with failed coronary sinus lead implantation?
Transapical placement of an LV endocardial pacing lead is a feasible and effective alternative strategy for cardiac resynchronization therapy when coronary sinus lead implantation fails.
Kassai et al. (2011) conducted an observational in Failure of coronary sinus lead implantation for resynchronization therapy (n=20). Transapical endocardial left ventricular pacing lead implantation was evaluated on Improvement in LV dimensions, ejection fraction, and functional status. Transapical endocardial left ventricular pacing lead implantation improved ejection fraction (Δ9.5 ± 9.6%) and functional status (Δ1.1 ± 0.3) at >1 year follow-up.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: