Padeletti Luigi, Colella Andrea, Michelucci Antonio, Pieragnoli Paolo, Ricciardi Giuseppe, Porciani Maria Cristina, Tronconi Francesca, Hettrick Douglas A, Valsecchi Sergio
University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Am J Cardiol. 2008 Dec 15;102(12):1687-92. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.08.016. Epub 2008 Sep 20.
Simultaneous stimulation of 2 left ventricular (LV) sites could enhance the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of this study was to evaluate the acute hemodynamic response to dual-site LV CRT. Two LV pacing leads were successfully implanted in 12 CRT candidates (New York Heart Association classes III to IV, QRS >or=120 ms). Target positions were the lateral or posterolateral vein (site A) and anterior or anterolateral vein (site B). A conductance catheter was placed in the left ventricle for pressure-volume measurements. Tested CRT configurations were alternated by atrial overdrive pacing at a fixed rate and included site A and B single-site CRT and dual-site LV CRT (2 LV sites plus right ventricular apex) at 4 atrioventricular intervals. Overall, single-site LV CRT significantly enhanced stroke volume, stroke work, maximum pressure derivative, and conductance-derived indexes of LV synchrony when delivered in site A, whereas no significant changes were noticed with pacing in site B. Specifically, site-A pacing resulted in a higher stroke volume increase (LV pacing site associated with the best hemodynamic response [best-LV]) in 8 patients, and site-B pacing, in 4 patients. At intermediate atrioventricular intervals, dual-site LV CRT resulted in improved stroke volume, stroke work, maximum pressure derivative, and LV synchrony with respect to single-site CRT when delivered at the best-LV (all p <0.05). However, single-site CRT at best-LV produced results similar to dual-site LV CRT when the atrioventricular interval was optimized in each patient. In conclusion, adding a second LV lead does not result in further improvement in acute hemodynamic response with respect to standard CRT when the single LV pacing site and atrioventricular interval are optimal.
同时刺激左心室(LV)的两个部位可增强心脏再同步治疗(CRT)的效果。本研究旨在评估双部位左心室CRT的急性血流动力学反应。在12例CRT候选患者(纽约心脏协会III至IV级,QRS≥120 ms)中成功植入两根左心室起搏导线。目标位置是外侧或后外侧静脉(A部位)和前侧或前外侧静脉(B部位)。将一根电导导管置于左心室内用于压力-容积测量。通过以固定频率进行心房超速起搏来交替测试CRT配置,包括A部位和B部位的单部位CRT以及双部位左心室CRT(两个左心室部位加右心室心尖),共4种房室间期。总体而言,单部位左心室CRT在A部位起搏时可显著增加每搏输出量、每搏功、最大压力变化率以及左心室同步性的电导衍生指标,而B部位起搏时未观察到显著变化。具体而言,8例患者中A部位起搏导致每搏输出量增加更高(与最佳血流动力学反应相关的左心室起搏部位[最佳左心室]),4例患者中B部位起搏导致每搏输出量增加更高。在中等房室间期时,双部位左心室CRT在最佳左心室部位起搏时,与单部位CRT相比,可改善每搏输出量、每搏功、最大压力变化率以及左心室同步性(所有p<0.05)。然而,当在每个患者中优化房室间期时,最佳左心室部位的单部位CRT产生的结果与双部位左心室CRT相似。总之,当单左心室起搏部位和房室间期最佳时,相对于标准CRT,增加第二根左心室导线并不会导致急性血流动力学反应的进一步改善。