Loading…
Left ventricular endocardial pacing in the real world: Five years of experience at a single center
Background A left ventricular (LV) endocardial lead implant to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is feasible when a conventional implant failed due to anatomical or technical issues or when the venous implant was performed but the patient did not respond to the therapy. Methods Data ab...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 2019-02, Vol.42 (2), p.153-160 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73 |
| container_end_page | 160 |
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 153 |
| container_title | Pacing and clinical electrophysiology |
| container_volume | 42 |
| creator | García Guerrero, Juan J. Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín Doblado Calatrava, Manuel Redondo Méndez, Ángel Lázaro Medrano, Manuel Merchán Herrera, Antonio |
| description | Background
A left ventricular (LV) endocardial lead implant to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is feasible when a conventional implant failed due to anatomical or technical issues or when the venous implant was performed but the patient did not respond to the therapy.
Methods
Data about the implantation procedure (age, sex, clinical characteristics, anticoagulant use, and previous devices), patient characteristics (indication, technique used, lead model, complications), and follow‐up (clinical and echocardiographic outcome, LV lead electrical measurements) were analyzed for all CRT systems implanted using LV endocardial lead, due to failed conventional implant or nonresponse, between April 2011 and November 2016.
Results
Thirty‐five patients were implanted with an active fixation LV endocardial lead during the study period, without significant complications. There were no dislodgements or severe complications related to the implant procedure in the follow‐up period (36 ± 20 months) and a high percentage of patients responded to therapy, as assessed by several indicators.
Conclusions
An LV endocardial lead implant was feasible when the conventional technique had previously failed or was not effective. A high rate of response was achieved without any significant complications. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/pace.13591 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2159320504</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2159320504</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQQIMoun5c_AES8CJCdbJJmtTbsvgFC3rQc8kmU4102zVpV_ffG6168GAuA-HNY3iEHDI4Y-mdL43FM8ZlwTbIiEkBmWay2CQjYEJlmutih-zG-AIAOQi5TXY4yLwQUo_IfIZVR1fYdMHbvjaBYuNaa4LzpqbJ7Jsn6hvaPSMNmL7e2lC7C3rlV0jXaEKkbUXxfYnBY2ORmo4aGtNWjdQmLYZ9slWZOuLB99wjj1eXD9ObbHZ3fTudzDLLpWIZhzE65wQYV7DKwFwoo3JZoVVcmTnnmgFIlWs-tk4WWqUtjRJzjTkYo_geORm8y9C-9hi7cuGjxbo2DbZ9LMcpCh-DBJHQ4z_oS9uHJl2XKCWYyJngiTodKBvaGANW5TL4hQnrkkH5Wb78LF9-lU_w0beyny_Q_aI_qRPABuDN17j-R1XeT6aXg_QDOeaMnA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2174146143</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Left ventricular endocardial pacing in the real world: Five years of experience at a single center</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><source>EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus - Ebooks</source><creator>García Guerrero, Juan J. ; Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín ; Doblado Calatrava, Manuel ; Redondo Méndez, Ángel ; Lázaro Medrano, Manuel ; Merchán Herrera, Antonio</creator><creatorcontrib>García Guerrero, Juan J. ; Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín ; Doblado Calatrava, Manuel ; Redondo Méndez, Ángel ; Lázaro Medrano, Manuel ; Merchán Herrera, Antonio</creatorcontrib><description>Background
A left ventricular (LV) endocardial lead implant to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is feasible when a conventional implant failed due to anatomical or technical issues or when the venous implant was performed but the patient did not respond to the therapy.
Methods
Data about the implantation procedure (age, sex, clinical characteristics, anticoagulant use, and previous devices), patient characteristics (indication, technique used, lead model, complications), and follow‐up (clinical and echocardiographic outcome, LV lead electrical measurements) were analyzed for all CRT systems implanted using LV endocardial lead, due to failed conventional implant or nonresponse, between April 2011 and November 2016.
Results
Thirty‐five patients were implanted with an active fixation LV endocardial lead during the study period, without significant complications. There were no dislodgements or severe complications related to the implant procedure in the follow‐up period (36 ± 20 months) and a high percentage of patients responded to therapy, as assessed by several indicators.
Conclusions
An LV endocardial lead implant was feasible when the conventional technique had previously failed or was not effective. A high rate of response was achieved without any significant complications.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-8389</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1540-8159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/pace.13591</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30569458</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ; Cardiomyopathy, Dilated - therapy ; Defibrillators, Implantable ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Heart ; Heart Ventricles ; Humans ; left ventricular endocardial pacing ; Male ; Pacemaker, Artificial ; Time Factors ; transseptal approach ; Treatment Outcome ; Ventricle</subject><ispartof>Pacing and clinical electrophysiology, 2019-02, Vol.42 (2), p.153-160</ispartof><rights>2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7548-4108</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30569458$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>García Guerrero, Juan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doblado Calatrava, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Redondo Méndez, Ángel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lázaro Medrano, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merchán Herrera, Antonio</creatorcontrib><title>Left ventricular endocardial pacing in the real world: Five years of experience at a single center</title><title>Pacing and clinical electrophysiology</title><addtitle>Pacing Clin Electrophysiol</addtitle><description>Background
A left ventricular (LV) endocardial lead implant to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is feasible when a conventional implant failed due to anatomical or technical issues or when the venous implant was performed but the patient did not respond to the therapy.
Methods
Data about the implantation procedure (age, sex, clinical characteristics, anticoagulant use, and previous devices), patient characteristics (indication, technique used, lead model, complications), and follow‐up (clinical and echocardiographic outcome, LV lead electrical measurements) were analyzed for all CRT systems implanted using LV endocardial lead, due to failed conventional implant or nonresponse, between April 2011 and November 2016.
Results
Thirty‐five patients were implanted with an active fixation LV endocardial lead during the study period, without significant complications. There were no dislodgements or severe complications related to the implant procedure in the follow‐up period (36 ± 20 months) and a high percentage of patients responded to therapy, as assessed by several indicators.
Conclusions
An LV endocardial lead implant was feasible when the conventional technique had previously failed or was not effective. A high rate of response was achieved without any significant complications.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy</subject><subject>Cardiomyopathy, Dilated - therapy</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Heart Ventricles</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>left ventricular endocardial pacing</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Pacemaker, Artificial</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>transseptal approach</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Ventricle</subject><issn>0147-8389</issn><issn>1540-8159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQQIMoun5c_AES8CJCdbJJmtTbsvgFC3rQc8kmU4102zVpV_ffG6168GAuA-HNY3iEHDI4Y-mdL43FM8ZlwTbIiEkBmWay2CQjYEJlmutih-zG-AIAOQi5TXY4yLwQUo_IfIZVR1fYdMHbvjaBYuNaa4LzpqbJ7Jsn6hvaPSMNmL7e2lC7C3rlV0jXaEKkbUXxfYnBY2ORmo4aGtNWjdQmLYZ9slWZOuLB99wjj1eXD9ObbHZ3fTudzDLLpWIZhzE65wQYV7DKwFwoo3JZoVVcmTnnmgFIlWs-tk4WWqUtjRJzjTkYo_geORm8y9C-9hi7cuGjxbo2DbZ9LMcpCh-DBJHQ4z_oS9uHJl2XKCWYyJngiTodKBvaGANW5TL4hQnrkkH5Wb78LF9-lU_w0beyny_Q_aI_qRPABuDN17j-R1XeT6aXg_QDOeaMnA</recordid><startdate>201902</startdate><enddate>201902</enddate><creator>García Guerrero, Juan J.</creator><creator>Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín</creator><creator>Doblado Calatrava, Manuel</creator><creator>Redondo Méndez, Ángel</creator><creator>Lázaro Medrano, Manuel</creator><creator>Merchán Herrera, Antonio</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7548-4108</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201902</creationdate><title>Left ventricular endocardial pacing in the real world: Five years of experience at a single center</title><author>García Guerrero, Juan J. ; Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín ; Doblado Calatrava, Manuel ; Redondo Méndez, Ángel ; Lázaro Medrano, Manuel ; Merchán Herrera, Antonio</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy</topic><topic>Cardiomyopathy, Dilated - therapy</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Heart Ventricles</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>left ventricular endocardial pacing</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Pacemaker, Artificial</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>transseptal approach</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Ventricle</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>García Guerrero, Juan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doblado Calatrava, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Redondo Méndez, Ángel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lázaro Medrano, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merchán Herrera, Antonio</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Pacing and clinical electrophysiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>García Guerrero, Juan J.</au><au>Fernández de la Concha Castañeda, Joaquín</au><au>Doblado Calatrava, Manuel</au><au>Redondo Méndez, Ángel</au><au>Lázaro Medrano, Manuel</au><au>Merchán Herrera, Antonio</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Left ventricular endocardial pacing in the real world: Five years of experience at a single center</atitle><jtitle>Pacing and clinical electrophysiology</jtitle><addtitle>Pacing Clin Electrophysiol</addtitle><date>2019-02</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>153</spage><epage>160</epage><pages>153-160</pages><issn>0147-8389</issn><eissn>1540-8159</eissn><abstract>Background
A left ventricular (LV) endocardial lead implant to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is feasible when a conventional implant failed due to anatomical or technical issues or when the venous implant was performed but the patient did not respond to the therapy.
Methods
Data about the implantation procedure (age, sex, clinical characteristics, anticoagulant use, and previous devices), patient characteristics (indication, technique used, lead model, complications), and follow‐up (clinical and echocardiographic outcome, LV lead electrical measurements) were analyzed for all CRT systems implanted using LV endocardial lead, due to failed conventional implant or nonresponse, between April 2011 and November 2016.
Results
Thirty‐five patients were implanted with an active fixation LV endocardial lead during the study period, without significant complications. There were no dislodgements or severe complications related to the implant procedure in the follow‐up period (36 ± 20 months) and a high percentage of patients responded to therapy, as assessed by several indicators.
Conclusions
An LV endocardial lead implant was feasible when the conventional technique had previously failed or was not effective. A high rate of response was achieved without any significant complications.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>30569458</pmid><doi>10.1111/pace.13591</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7548-4108</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0147-8389 |
| ispartof | Pacing and clinical electrophysiology, 2019-02, Vol.42 (2), p.153-160 |
| issn | 0147-8389 1540-8159 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2159320504 |
| source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection; EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus - Ebooks |
| subjects | Aged Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Cardiomyopathy, Dilated - therapy Defibrillators, Implantable Female Follow-Up Studies Heart Heart Ventricles Humans left ventricular endocardial pacing Male Pacemaker, Artificial Time Factors transseptal approach Treatment Outcome Ventricle |
| title | Left ventricular endocardial pacing in the real world: Five years of experience at a single center |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T23%3A10%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Left%20ventricular%20endocardial%20pacing%20in%20the%20real%20world:%20Five%20years%20of%20experience%20at%20a%20single%20center&rft.jtitle=Pacing%20and%20clinical%20electrophysiology&rft.au=Garc%C3%ADa%20Guerrero,%20Juan%20J.&rft.date=2019-02&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=153&rft.epage=160&rft.pages=153-160&rft.issn=0147-8389&rft.eissn=1540-8159&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/pace.13591&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2159320504%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3571-302eddd40ad91fa0b47a765fec737ab338100576832cd59873578e5e68e60aa73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2174146143&rft_id=info:pmid/30569458&rfr_iscdi=true |