BiV pacing with SyncAV using an offset that minimized QRS duration reduced QRSd to 123 ms (-23.9%) compared to nominal simultaneous BiV pacing (142 ms) (P<0.001).
Observational (n=75)
Patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=75)
BiV+SyncAV with offset that minimized QRSd (Mode III) vs Nominal simultaneous BiV (Mode I)
QRS duration (QRSd) — -23.9% reduction, p=<0.001
Effect estimate: -23.9% reduction
Absolute Event Rate: 123% vs 142%
p-value: p=<0.001
Background QRS narrowing following cardiac resynchronization therapy with biventricular (BiV) or left ventricular (LV) pacing is likely affected by patient‐specific conduction characteristics ( PR , qLV, LV ‐paced propagation interval), making a universal programming strategy likely ineffective. We tested these factors using a novel, device‐based algorithm (Sync AV ) that automatically adjusts paced atrioventricular delay (default or programmable offset) according to intrinsic atrioventricular conduction. Methods and Results Seventy‐five patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (age 66±11 years; 65% male; 32% with ischemic cardiomyopathy; LV ejection fraction 28±8%; QRS duration 162±16 ms) with intact atrioventricular conduction (PR interval 194±34, range 128–300 ms), left bundle branch block, and optimized LV lead position were studied at implant. QRS duration ( QRS d) reduction was compared for the following pacing configurations: nominal simultaneous BiV (Mode I: paced/sensed atrioventricular delay=140/110 ms), BiV+Sync AV with 50 ms offset (Mode II ), BiV+Sync AV with offset that minimized QRS d (Mode III ), or LV ‐only pacing+Sync AV with 50 ms offset (Mode IV ). The intrinsic QRS d (162±16 ms) was reduced to 142±17 ms (−11.8%) by Mode I, 136±14 ms (−15.6%) by Mode IV , and 132±13 ms (−17.8%) by Mode II . Mode III yielded the shortest overall QRS d (123±12 ms, −23.9% P <0.001 versus all modes) and was the only configuration without QRS d prolongation in any patient. QRS narrowing occurred regardless of QRS d, PR , or LV ‐paced intervals, or underlying ischemic disease. Conclusions Post‐implant electrical optimization in already well‐selected patients with left bundle branch block and optimized LV lead position is facilitated by patient‐tailored BiV pacing adjusted to intrinsic atrioventricular timing using an automatic device–based algorithm.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Niraj Varma
Electrophysiology
David O’Donnell
Electrophysiology
Mohammed Bassiouny
Journal of the American Heart Association
Cleveland Clinic
Université de Bordeaux
Montreal Heart Institute
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Varma et al. (Tue,) conducted a observational in Patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=75). BiV+SyncAV with offset that minimized QRSd (Mode III) vs. Nominal simultaneous BiV (Mode I) was evaluated on QRS duration (QRSd) (-23.9% reduction, p=<0.001). BiV pacing with SyncAV using an offset that minimized QRS duration reduced QRSd to 123 ms (-23.9%) compared to nominal simultaneous BiV pacing (142 ms) (P<0.001).
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1542e8cb801b7f954e4897 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.117.007489