Key result
Echo-guided CRT-P optimization improves LVEF by ~39 points in an initial non-responder.
Why the study?
CRT is an established treatment for HFrEF and LBBB, with response rates generally ranging from 55% to 70% in large trials and CRT-P typically used in older patients who are not candidates for a defibrillator.
Case Report (n=1)
No
Echocardiography-guided AV and VV delay optimization can convert a 6-month CRT-P non-responder with HFrEF and LBBB into a super-responder with normalized LVEF and improved functional class at 1 year.
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and electrical dyssynchrony, especially in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). In symptomatic patients with LVEF ≤35%, sinus rhythm and LBBB with a QRS duration ≥130 ms despite optimal treatment, CRT is suggested according to the 2021 ESC Guidelines to enhance symptoms, quality of life, and survival. In older patients who are not candidates for a defibrillator, cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker (CRT-P) is generally used. Response rates are generally 55% to 70% in large trials, with optimal outcomes in patients with LBBB and QRS duration ≥150 ms. Case Presentations: A 76-year-old woman physician with hypertension and dyslipidaemia, despite optimal treatment, presented with NYHA class III. ECG revealed complete LBBB in sinus rhythm. Echocardiography demonstrated an LVEF of 28%, left ventricular dilation, and significant functional mitral regurgitation. Coronary angiography was negative for obstructive coronary artery disease. CRT-P was implanted. At 6 months, the patient was still a non-responder with persistent systolic dysfunction, adverse remodelling, diastolic dysfunction and residual regurgitation. Echocardiography-guided device optimization adjusting AV delay by transmitral Doppler to preserve atrial contribution, VV delay by LVOT VTI and strain analysis to improve synchronization and reduce regurgitation. At One-year follow-up, the patient showed significant improvement in NYHA class I–II and improved exercise tolerance. Echocardiography showed significant reverse remodelling, and LVEF was improved to 67%. Device interrogation revealed ongoing thresholds and >99% biventricular pacing. Conclusions: This case illustrates a CRT-P super-responder outcome, the role of guideline-directed selection, close follow-up, and tailored optimization to maximize both clinical and structural benefits.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramadhan et al. (2026) conducted a case report in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and complete left bundle branch block (LBBB) (n=1). Cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker (CRT-P) with echocardiography-guided AV and VV delay optimization was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and NYHA functional class. CRT-P with echocardiography-guided AV and VV delay optimization improved LVEF from 28% to 67% and NYHA class from III to I-II at 1 year in an initial non-responder.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: