Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
99879
Reference Type
Journal Article
Title
Should the left ventricular pacing lead be positioned at the site of latest mechanical activation in cardiac resynchronization therapy?
Author(s)
Van Bommel, RJ; Schalij, MJ; Bax, JJ
Year
2009
Is Peer Reviewed?
Yes
Journal
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
ISSN:
1045-3873
EISSN:
1540-8167
Volume
20
Issue
5
Page Numbers
536-538
Language
English
PMID
19054250
DOI
10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01388.x
Abstract
INTRODUCTION:
The optimal left ventricular (LV) pacing site for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is unclear. The current study aims to explore the clinical significance of LV lead concordance to delayed contraction segment in CRT.
METHODS AND RESULTS:
Concordant LV lead position was defined as the lead tip located by fluoroscopy at or immediately adjacent to the LV segment with latest contraction determined by tissue Doppler imaging. Echocardiographic and clinical outcomes among 101 consecutive patients with or without concordant LV lead positions were compared. There was no significant difference in changes in LV volumes and clinical parameters between patients with concordant (n = 46) or nonconcordant (n = 55) LV lead positions at 3 and 6 months. In multivariate analysis, the baseline asynchrony index (beta= 1.092, 95% CI: 1.050-1.114; P < 0.001), but not LV lead concordance, was the only independent predictor of LV reverse remodeling. By Cox regression analysis, ischemic etiology, and LV reverse remodeling, but not LV lead concordance, were independent predictors of mortality (beta= 2.475, 95% CI: 1.183-5.178; P = 0.016, and beta= 0.272, 95% CI: 0.130-0.567; P < 0.001, respectively), cardiovascular hospitalization (beta= 1.551, 95% CI: 1.032-2.333; P = 0.035, and beta= 0.460, 95% CI: 0.298-0.708; P < 0.001, respectively), and heart failure hospitalization (beta= 0.486, 95% CI: 0.320-0.738; P = 0.001 for LV reverse remodeling).
CONCLUSION:
LV lead concordance to the delayed contraction segment may not be a major determining factor for favorable echocardiographic and clinical outcomes after CRT.
Keywords
chronic heart-failure; radial strain; dyssynchrony; tissue; mortality; impact
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity