Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a new therapeutic option in patients with
heart failure and ventricular conduction delay. We compared the long-term performance
of left ventricular (LV) pacing via the coronary venous (CV) approach and a limited
lateral thoracotomy (LLT). Data from 81 patients (age 65 ± 12 years; 52 men, New York
Heart Association class 3.0 ± 0.4, ejection fraction 24 ± 6%) were retrospectively
analyzed for 1 year after implantation of a CRT system. Twenty-five patients received
LLT leads and 56 patients received CV leads. Postoperative hospitalization was shorter
after CV lead implantation (8 ± 4 vs 12 ± 5 days, p <0.01). No significant differences
in LV pacing and sensing performance between both approaches were observed after 12
months. Reinterventions were necessary in 7 patients after CV implantation compared
with only 1 reintervention (4%) in the LLT group (p = NS). Postoperative chest radiographs
revealed an anterior lead position in 11 of 25 patients (44%) in the LLT group versus
3 of 56 patients (5.4%) in the CV group (p = 0.00007). Echocardiographic data demonstrated
a sig-nificant increase in LV ejection fraction in the CV group (from 26.1 ± 5.2%
to 35.3 ± 14.3% at 12 months, p <0.001, n = 42) in contrast to the LLT group (from
24.5 ± 6.2% to 28.5 ± 7.5% at 12 months, p = NS, n = 16) at 12-month follow-up. Cardiopulmonary
exercise testing in 35 patients showed significantly more improvement in peak oxygen
consumption after 12 months in the CV group (15.5 ± 3.1 vs 13.6 ± 2.6 ml/min/kg at
implant, n = 22) compared with the LLT group (12.7 ± 1.5 vs 11.8 ml/min/kg at implant,
n = 13, p = 0.004). At 1-year follow-up the mortality rate was 24% (6 of 25) after
LLT lead implantation versus 12.5% (7 of 56) after CV implantation (p = NS). Our data
show that the LLT approach for LV lead placement in CRT systems has the advantage
of a lower incidence of reinterventions. Hospitalization was longer, increase in functional
capacity smaller, and mortality at 1-year follow-up higher, which were potentially
related to a more anterior lead position. Therefore, CV leads are preferable to LLT
leads.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to American Journal of CardiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Effect of pacing chamber and atrioventricular delay on acute systolic function of paced patients with congestive heart failure.Circulation. 1999; 99: 2993-3001
- Improved left ventricular mechanics from acute VDD pacing in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and ventricular conduction delay.Circulation. 1999; 99: 1567-1573
- Evaluation of different ventricular pacing sites in patients with severe heart failure.Circulation. 1997; 96: 3273-3277
- Acute hemodynamic effects of biventricular DDD pacing in patients with end-stage heart failure.J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 32: 1825-1831
- Multisite Stimulation in Cardiomyopathies (MUSTIC) Study Investigators.N Engl J Med. 2001; 12: 873-880
- Implantation techniques and chronic lead parameters of biventricular pacing dual-chamber defibrillators.J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2002; 13: 964-970
- Left heart pacing-experience with several types of coronary vein leads.J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2002; 6: 71-75
- Is the left ventricular lateral wall the best lead implantation site for cardiac resynchronization therapy?.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2003; 26: 162-168
- Transvenous left ventricular lead implantation with the EASYTRAK lead system.Am J Cardiol. 2000; 86: K157-K164
- Permanent left ventricular pacing with transvenous lead inserted into coronary veins.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1998; 21: 239-245
- Initial United Kingdom experience with the use of permanent, biventricular pacemakers.Europace. 2000; 2: 233-239
- Six years experience of transvenous left ventricular lead implantation for permanent biventricular pacing in patients with advanced heart failure.Heart. 2001; 86: 405-410
- The Pacing Therapies for Congestive Heart Failure (PATH-CHF) study.Am J Cardiol. 1999; 83: 130D-135D
- Excercise performance following cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure and ventricular conduction delay.Am J Cardiol. 2002; 89: 198-203
- Long-term improvements in quality of life by biventricular pacing in patients with chronic heart failure.Am J Cardiol. 2003; 91: 1090-1095
- Effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy on left ventricular size and function in chronic heart failure.Circulation. 2003; 107: 1985-1990
- Multisite pacing as a supplemental treatment of congestive heart failure.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1998; 21: 2249-2255
- Effect of resynchronization therapy stimulation site on the systolic function of heart failure patients.Circulation. 2001; 104: 3026-3029
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
March 15,
2004
Received in revised form:
March 15,
2004
Received:
November 5,
2003
Identification
Copyright
© 2004 Excerpta Medica Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
