Arrhythmologic Center, Ospedali del Tigullio, Via Don Bobbio 24, Lavagna, Italy.
Ospedale Apuane, Massa, Italy.
Europace. 2019 Mar 1;21(3):502-510. doi: 10.1093/europace/euy275.
Anatomical placement of the coronary sinus (CS) lead in basal or mid-ventricular positions of the posterior and lateral walls is associated with a better clinical outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We hypothesized that optimization of CS lead placement targeted the right-to-left electrical delay (RLD) predicts an additional clinical benefit.
The CS lead was placed according to current standards in 90 patients (Conventional group) and at the site of the longest RLD in 121 patients (RLD group). Non-responders were defined as those who died or underwent hospitalization for heart failure or did not improve in their Clinical Composite Score within 6 months. There were 67 (32%) non-responders. Compared with Conventional group, the final CS pacing site was more frequently in the basal segments in the RLD group (40% vs. 23%, P = 0.007); moreover, the RLD ratio (%RLD) of the total QRS width was longer (77 ± 13 vs. 73 ± 15, P = 0.05) and biventricular QRS shortened more from the baseline (-31 ± 21 ms vs. -21 ± 26 ms, P = 0.004). Nevertheless, the rate of non-responders was similar in the RLD and Conventional groups (35% vs. 28%, P = 0.30), as was %RLD (76 ± 16 vs. 75 ± 13, P = 0.66). QRS width during right ventricular (RV) pacing was an independent predictors of adverse outcome, with a 2% increase in the risk of failure for each 1 ms increase in QRS (P = 0.006).
Optimization of CS lead placement targeted to latest electrical activation does not provide additional clinical benefit to anatomical placement in basal or mid-ventricular positions of the posterior and lateral walls. QRS width during RV pacing was a strong predictor of CRT failure.
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03204864.
冠状窦(CS)导联在心脏后侧壁的基底或中间心室位置的解剖学放置与心脏再同步治疗(CRT)的临床转归更好相关。我们假设,针对右至左电延迟(RLD)的 CS 导联放置优化可预测额外的临床获益。
90 例患者(常规组)按照当前标准放置 CS 导联,121 例患者(RLD 组)在 RLD 最长处放置 CS 导联。无应答者定义为 6 个月内死亡或因心力衰竭住院或临床综合评分无改善的患者。共有 67 例(32%)无应答者。与常规组相比,RLD 组 CS 最终起搏部位更常位于基底段(40%比 23%,P=0.007);此外,总 QRS 宽度的 RLD 比值(%RLD)更长(77±13 比 73±15,P=0.05),双心室 QRS 从基线缩短更多(-31±21 比-21±26 毫秒,P=0.004)。然而,RLD 组和常规组的无应答率相似(35%比 28%,P=0.30),%RLD 也相似(76±16 比 75±13,P=0.66)。右心室(RV)起搏时 QRS 宽度是不良结局的独立预测因子,QRS 每增加 1 毫秒,失败风险增加 2%(P=0.006)。
针对最新电激活的 CS 导联放置优化并不能为后侧壁基底或中间心室位置的解剖学放置提供额外的临床获益。RV 起搏时 QRS 宽度是 CRT 失败的强有力预测因子。