JACC. Clinical electrophysiology · 2020
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Guided by Echocardiography, MRI, and CT Imaging: A Randomized Controlled Study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Borgquist Rasmus, Carlsson Marcus, Markstad Hanna, Werther-Evaldsson Anna, Ostenfeld Ellen, Roijer Anders, Bakos Zoltan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated if selecting the left ventricular (LV) target segment by echocardiography-derived late mechanical activation, with access to multimodality imaging for scar and venous anatomy, could help to increase responder rates to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).
BACKGROUND: LV lead placement is important for clinical outcome, but the optimal strategy for LV lead placement in CRT is still debated.
METHODS: This study conducted a prospective, blinded randomized controlled trial on 102 patients with indication for CRT (27% women, 46% with ischemic cardiomyopathy, 63% in New York Heart Association functional class III, 74% with left bundle branch block, and with mean ejection fraction of 23%). Optimal LV lead location was defined as the latest mechanically activated available segment (free of transmural scar), determined by radial strain echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance (n = 70). The primary endpoint was reduction of LV end-systolic volume by ≥15% at 6 months post-implantation.
RESULTS: Patients were followed for 47 ± 21 months. Based on imaging, optimal or adjacent lead placement was feasible in 96% of all cases and was obtained in 83% of the intervention group versus 80% of the control group. Fifty-six percent of the patients were LV end-systolic volume responders compared with the control group (55%) (p = 0.96), and 71% improved ≥1 New York Heart Association functional class (74% vs. 67%; p = 0.43). Death or heart failure hospitalization within 2 years occurred in 6% (2% of the intervention group vs. 10% of the control group; p = 0.07).
CONCLUSIONS: Radial strain-guided LV lead placement, in combination with multimodality imaging, did not result in increased clinical or echocardiographic response, nor in a significant reduction of death or heart failure hospitalization. (Combining Myocardial Strain and Cardiac CT to Optimize Left Ventricular Lead Placement in CRT Treatment [CRT Clinic]; NCT01426321).
BACKGROUND: LV lead placement is important for clinical outcome, but the optimal strategy for LV lead placement in CRT is still debated.
METHODS: This study conducted a prospective, blinded randomized controlled trial on 102 patients with indication for CRT (27% women, 46% with ischemic cardiomyopathy, 63% in New York Heart Association functional class III, 74% with left bundle branch block, and with mean ejection fraction of 23%). Optimal LV lead location was defined as the latest mechanically activated available segment (free of transmural scar), determined by radial strain echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance (n = 70). The primary endpoint was reduction of LV end-systolic volume by ≥15% at 6 months post-implantation.
RESULTS: Patients were followed for 47 ± 21 months. Based on imaging, optimal or adjacent lead placement was feasible in 96% of all cases and was obtained in 83% of the intervention group versus 80% of the control group. Fifty-six percent of the patients were LV end-systolic volume responders compared with the control group (55%) (p = 0.96), and 71% improved ≥1 New York Heart Association functional class (74% vs. 67%; p = 0.43). Death or heart failure hospitalization within 2 years occurred in 6% (2% of the intervention group vs. 10% of the control group; p = 0.07).
CONCLUSIONS: Radial strain-guided LV lead placement, in combination with multimodality imaging, did not result in increased clinical or echocardiographic response, nor in a significant reduction of death or heart failure hospitalization. (Combining Myocardial Strain and Cardiac CT to Optimize Left Ventricular Lead Placement in CRT Treatment [CRT Clinic]; NCT01426321).