To Andrew C Y, Benatti Rodolfo D, Sato Kimi, Grimm Richard A, Thomas James D, Wilkoff Bruce L, Agler Deborah, Popović Zoran B
Section of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Department of Cardiology, North Shore Hospital, 124 Shakespeare Rd, Takapuna, Auckland, New Zealand.
Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2016 Apr 18;14:14. doi: 10.1186/s12947-016-0057-4.
Patients with non-ischemic heart failure etiology and left bundle branch block (LBBB) show better response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). While these patients have the most pronounced left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony, LV dyssynchrony assessment often fails to predict outcome. We hypothesized that patients with favorable outcome from CRT can be identified by a characteristic strain distribution pattern.
From 313 patients who underwent CRT between 2003 and 2006, we identified 10 patients who were CRT non-responders (no LV end-systolic volume [LVESV] reduction) with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and LBBB and compared with randomly selected CRT responders (n = 10; LVESV reduction ≥15%). Longitudinal strain (εlong) data were obtained by speckle tracking echocardiography before and after (9 ± 5 months) CRT implantation and standardized segmental εlong-time curves were obtained by averaging individual patients.
In responders, ejection fraction (EF) increased from 25 ± 9 to 40 ± 11% (p = 0.002), while in non-responders, EF was unchanged (20 ± 8 to 21 ± 5%, p = 0.57). Global εlong was significantly lower in non-responders at pre CRT (p = 0.02) and only improved in responders (p = 0.04) after CRT. Pre CRT septal εlong -time curves in both groups showed early septal contraction with mid-systolic decrease, while lateral εlong showed early stretch followed by vigorous mid to late contraction. Restoration of contraction synchrony was observed in both groups, though non-responder remained low amplitude of εlong.
CRT non-responders with LBBB and non-ischemic etiology showed a similar improvement of εlong pattern with responders after CRT implantation, while amplitude of εlong remained unchanged. Lower εlong in the non-responders may account for their poor response to CRT.
病因是非缺血性心力衰竭且存在左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)的患者对心脏再同步治疗(CRT)反应更佳。虽然这些患者存在最明显的左心室(LV)不同步,但LV不同步评估往往无法预测治疗结果。我们推测,CRT治疗效果良好的患者可通过一种特征性应变分布模式来识别。
从2003年至2006年间接受CRT治疗的313例患者中,我们确定了10例CRT无反应者(左心室收缩末期容积[LVESV]无减少),其患有非缺血性心肌病和LBBB,并与随机选择的CRT反应者(n = 10;LVESV减少≥15%)进行比较。在CRT植入前后(9±5个月)通过斑点追踪超声心动图获得纵向应变(εlong)数据,并通过对个体患者数据进行平均获得标准化节段性εlong -时间曲线。
反应者的射血分数(EF)从25±9%增加至40±11%(p = 0.002),而无反应者的EF无变化(20±8%至21±5%,p = 0.57)。在CRT治疗前,无反应者的整体εlong显著更低(p = 0.02),且仅在反应者中CRT治疗后有所改善(p = 0.04)。两组治疗前的室间隔εlong -时间曲线均显示室间隔早期收缩伴收缩中期下降,而侧壁εlong显示早期拉伸随后是强烈的中晚期收缩。两组均观察到收缩同步性的恢复,尽管无反应者的εlong幅度仍较低。
患有LBBB且病因是非缺血性的CRT无反应者在CRT植入后与反应者表现出相似的εlong模式改善,而εlong幅度保持不变。无反应者较低的εlong可能是其对CRT反应不佳的原因。