Left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy: where and how?

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) offers proven benefit to patients with refractory symptomatic chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association Class III or IV), severe left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction (LV ejection fraction 120 ms). Cardiac resynchronization therapy has the potenti...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Europace (London, England) England), 2009-05, Vol.11 (5), p.554-561
Main Authors: Khan, Fakhar Zaman, Virdee, Munmohan Singh, Fynn, Simon Patrick, Dutka, David Paul
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cicatrix - physiopathology
Defibrillators, Implantable
Heart Conduction System - physiopathology
Heart Failure - physiopathology
Heart Failure - therapy
Heart Ventricles - physiopathology
Humans
Pacemaker, Artificial
Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - physiopathology
Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - therapy
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) offers proven benefit to patients with refractory symptomatic chronic heart failure (New York Heart Association Class III or IV), severe left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction (LV ejection fraction 120 ms). Cardiac resynchronization therapy has the potential to improve survival and functional capacity, reduce hospital admissions, and promote LV reverse remodelling. Although difficult to truly evaluate, up to 30% of patients do not attain symptomatic benefit. Factors associated with a poor outcome include inappropriate patient selection, inadequate device programming, presence of myocardial scar, and suboptimal LV lead placement. Left ventricular dyssynchrony is an important determinant of CRT response, although at present no reliable single measure to identify patients beyond QRS width has been identified. In this review, we discuss the effect of LV lead placement to pace the region of maximal dyssynchrony, the impact of total scar burden on response, and the relationship between LV lead position and localized scar. Consideration is also given to prospectively defining placement of the LV lead including surgical epicardial lead positioning.
ISSN:1099-5129
1532-2092
DOI:10.1093/europace/eup076