TY - JOUR

T1 - Electrically vs. imaging-guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy

T2 - a randomized controlled trial

AU - Stephansen, Charlotte

AU - Sommer, Anders

AU - Kronborg, Mads Brix

AU - Jensen, Jesper Møller

AU - Nørgaard, Bjarne Linde

AU - Gerdes, Christian

AU - Kristensen, Jens

AU - Jensen, Henrik Kjærulf

AU - Fyenbo, Daniel Benjamin

AU - Bouchelouche, Kirsten

AU - Nielsen, Jens Cosedis

N1 - Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

PY - 2019/9

Y1 - 2019/9

N2 - AIMS: To test in a double-blinded, randomized trial whether the combination of electrically guided left ventricular (LV) lead placement and post-implant interventricular pacing delay (VVd) optimization results in superior increase in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients.METHODS AND RESULTS: Stratified according to presence of ischaemic heart disease, 122 patients were randomized 1:1 to LV lead placement targeted towards the latest electrically activated segment identified by systematic mapping of the coronary sinus tributaries during CRT implantation combined with post-implant VVd optimization (intervention group) or imaging-guided LV lead implantation by cardiac computed tomography venography, 82Rubidium myocardial perfusion imaging and speckle tracking echocardiography targeting the LV lead towards the latest mechanically activated non-scarred myocardial segment (control group). Follow-up was 6 months. Primary endpoint was absolute increase in LVEF. Additional outcome measures were changes in New York Heart Association class, 6-minute walk test, and quality of life, LV reverse remodelling, and device related complications. Analysis was intention-to-treat. A larger increase in LVEF was observed in the intervention group (11 ± 10 vs. 7 ± 11%; 95% confidence interval 0.4-7.9%, P = 0.03); when adjusting for pre-specified baseline covariates this difference did not maintain statistical significance (P = 0.09). Clinical response, LV reverse remodelling, and complication rates did not differ between treatment groups.CONCLUSION: Electrically guided CRT implantation appeared non-inferior to an imaging-guided strategy considering the outcomes of change in LVEF, LV reverse remodelling and clinical response. Larger long-term studies are warranted to investigate the effect of an electrically guided CRT strategy.

AB - AIMS: To test in a double-blinded, randomized trial whether the combination of electrically guided left ventricular (LV) lead placement and post-implant interventricular pacing delay (VVd) optimization results in superior increase in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients.METHODS AND RESULTS: Stratified according to presence of ischaemic heart disease, 122 patients were randomized 1:1 to LV lead placement targeted towards the latest electrically activated segment identified by systematic mapping of the coronary sinus tributaries during CRT implantation combined with post-implant VVd optimization (intervention group) or imaging-guided LV lead implantation by cardiac computed tomography venography, 82Rubidium myocardial perfusion imaging and speckle tracking echocardiography targeting the LV lead towards the latest mechanically activated non-scarred myocardial segment (control group). Follow-up was 6 months. Primary endpoint was absolute increase in LVEF. Additional outcome measures were changes in New York Heart Association class, 6-minute walk test, and quality of life, LV reverse remodelling, and device related complications. Analysis was intention-to-treat. A larger increase in LVEF was observed in the intervention group (11 ± 10 vs. 7 ± 11%; 95% confidence interval 0.4-7.9%, P = 0.03); when adjusting for pre-specified baseline covariates this difference did not maintain statistical significance (P = 0.09). Clinical response, LV reverse remodelling, and complication rates did not differ between treatment groups.CONCLUSION: Electrically guided CRT implantation appeared non-inferior to an imaging-guided strategy considering the outcomes of change in LVEF, LV reverse remodelling and clinical response. Larger long-term studies are warranted to investigate the effect of an electrically guided CRT strategy.

KW - Cardiac resynchronization therapy

KW - Electrical activation mapping

KW - Imaging

KW - Interventricular pacing delay optimization

KW - Left ventricular lead placement

KW - QLV

U2 - 10.1093/europace/euz184

DO - 10.1093/europace/euz184

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 31274152

VL - 21

SP - 1369

EP - 1377

JO - Europace

JF - Europace

SN - 1099-5129

IS - 9

ER -