Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2010
Is "hyper response" to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy a recovery, a remission, or a control?
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Castellant Philippe, Orhan Erwann, Bertault-Valls Valerie, Fatemi Marjaneh, Etienne Yves, Blanc Jean-Jacques
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Some patients treated by cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recover "normal" left ventricular (LV) function and functional status. However, whether this "normalization" persists or reverts over time remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of LV function in patients hyper responder to CRT.
METHODS: Eleven consecutive patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, sinus rhythm, left bundle branch block (LBBB), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV, and optimal pharmacological treatment were hyper responder as they fulfilled concurrently the two following criteria: functional recovery (NYHA class I or II) and normalization of LV ejection fraction (LVEF).
RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 65 ± 30 months between CRT implantation and last evaluation LVEF improved from 26 ± 9 to 59 ± 6% (P < 0.0001). One patient died from pulmonary embolism 31 months after implantation. Three patients exhibited LVEF ≤ 50% at their last follow-up visit (two at 40% and one at 45%). In eight patients, brief cessation of pacing was feasible (three were pacemaker-dependent). Mean QRS duration decreased from 181 ± 23 ms to 143 ± 22 ms (P = 0.006). In one patient, pacing was interrupted for 2 years and LVEF decreased markedly (from 65% to 31%) but returned to normal after a few months when pacing was resumed.
CONCLUSION: In hyper responder patients, "normalization" of LV function after CRT persists as long as pacing is maintained with an excellent survival.
METHODS: Eleven consecutive patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, sinus rhythm, left bundle branch block (LBBB), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV, and optimal pharmacological treatment were hyper responder as they fulfilled concurrently the two following criteria: functional recovery (NYHA class I or II) and normalization of LV ejection fraction (LVEF).
RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 65 ± 30 months between CRT implantation and last evaluation LVEF improved from 26 ± 9 to 59 ± 6% (P < 0.0001). One patient died from pulmonary embolism 31 months after implantation. Three patients exhibited LVEF ≤ 50% at their last follow-up visit (two at 40% and one at 45%). In eight patients, brief cessation of pacing was feasible (three were pacemaker-dependent). Mean QRS duration decreased from 181 ± 23 ms to 143 ± 22 ms (P = 0.006). In one patient, pacing was interrupted for 2 years and LVEF decreased markedly (from 65% to 31%) but returned to normal after a few months when pacing was resumed.
CONCLUSION: In hyper responder patients, "normalization" of LV function after CRT persists as long as pacing is maintained with an excellent survival.