Department of Physiology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Department of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Centre (Radboudumc), Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Feb 4;75(4):347-359. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.040.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is usually performed by biventricular (BiV) pacing. Previously, feasibility of transvenous implantation of a lead at the left ventricular (LV) endocardial side of the interventricular septum, referred to as LV septal (LVs) pacing, was demonstrated.
The authors sought to compare the acute electrophysiological and hemodynamic effects of LVs with BiV and His bundle (HB) pacing in CRT patients.
Temporary LVs pacing (transaortic approach) alone or in combination with right ventricular (RV) (LVs+RV), BiV, and HB pacing was performed in 27 patients undergoing CRT implantation. Electrophysiological changes were assessed using electrocardiography (QRS duration), vectorcardiography (QRS area), and multielectrode body surface mapping (standard deviation of activation times [SDAT]). Hemodynamic changes were assessed as the first derivative of LV pressure (LVdP/dtmax).
As compared with baseline, LVs pacing resulted in a larger reduction in QRS area (to 73 ± 22 μVs) and SDAT (to 26 ± 7 ms) than BiV (to 93 ± 26 μVs and 31 ± 7 ms; both p < 0.05) and LVs+RV pacing (to 108 ± 37 μVs; p < 0.05; and 29 ± 8 ms; p = 0.05). The increase in LVdP/dtmax was similar during LVs and BiV pacing (17 ± 10% vs. 17 ± 9%, respectively) and larger than during LVs+RV pacing (11 ± 9%; p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between basal, mid-, or apical LVs levels in LVdP/dtmax and SDAT. In a subgroup of 16 patients, changes in QRS area, SDAT, and LVdP/dtmax were comparable between LVs and HB pacing.
LVs pacing provides short-term hemodynamic improvement and electrical resynchronization that is at least as good as during BiV and possibly HB pacing. These results indicate that LVs pacing may serve as a valuable alternative for CRT.
心脏再同步治疗(CRT)通常通过双心室(BiV)起搏来实现。此前,已经证明经静脉在心室内隔的左心室(LV)心内膜侧植入导线(称为 LV 间隔(LVs)起搏)是可行的。
作者旨在比较 LVs 起搏与 CRT 患者的 BiV 和希氏束(HB)起搏的急性电生理和血液动力学效应。
在 27 例接受 CRT 植入的患者中,单独或联合右心室(RV)(LVs+RV)、BiV 和 HB 起搏进行临时 LVs 起搏(经主动脉途径)。使用心电图(QRS 持续时间)、向量心电图(QRS 面积)和多电极体表映射(激活时间标准差 [SDAT])评估电生理变化。通过左心室压力的一阶导数(LVdP/dtmax)评估血液动力学变化。
与基线相比,LVs 起搏导致 QRS 面积(降至 73 ± 22 μVs)和 SDAT(降至 26 ± 7 ms)的减小幅度大于 BiV(降至 93 ± 26 μVs 和 31 ± 7 ms;均 p < 0.05)和 LVs+RV 起搏(降至 108 ± 37 μVs;p < 0.05;和 29 ± 8 ms;p = 0.05)。LVs 和 BiV 起搏时的 LVdP/dtmax 增加相似(分别为 17 ± 10%和 17 ± 9%),大于 LVs+RV 起搏(11 ± 9%;p < 0.05)。LVdP/dtmax 和 SDAT 在 LV 基底部、中部或顶部水平之间没有显著差异。在 16 例患者的亚组中,LVs 和 HB 起搏时 QRS 面积、SDAT 和 LVdP/dtmax 的变化相似。
LVs 起搏可提供短期血液动力学改善和电同步,至少与 BiV 和可能的 HB 起搏一样好。这些结果表明,LVs 起搏可能成为 CRT 的一种有价值的替代方法。