Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.
Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 11, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.
Europace. 2023 Aug 2;25(9). doi: 10.1093/europace/euad267.
Several studies have evaluated the use of electrically- or imaging-guided left ventricular (LV) lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients. We aimed to assess evidence for a guided strategy that targets LV lead position to the site of latest LV activation.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) until March 2023 that evaluated electrically- or imaging-guided LV lead positioning on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization, and secondary endpoints were quality of life, 6-min walk test (6MWT), QRS duration, LV end-systolic volume, and LV ejection fraction. We included eight RCTs that comprised 1323 patients. Six RCTs compared guided strategy (n = 638) to routine (n = 468), and two RCTs compared different guiding strategies head-to-head: electrically- (n = 111) vs. imaging-guided (n = 106). Compared to routine, a guided strategy did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary endpoint after 12-24 (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52-1.33) months. A guided strategy was associated with slight improvement in 6MWT distance after 6 months of follow-up of absolute 18 (95% CI 6-30) m between groups, but not in remaining secondary endpoints. None of the secondary endpoints differed between the guided strategies.
In this study, a CRT implantation strategy that targets the latest LV activation did not improve survival or reduce heart failure hospitalizations.
多项研究评估了在心脏再同步治疗(CRT)受者中使用电或影像学引导左心室(LV)导线放置的效果。我们旨在评估针对 LV 导线位置到 LV 最晚激活部位的指导策略的证据。
对截至 2023 年 3 月的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,这些 RCT 评估了电或影像学引导 LV 导线定位对临床和超声心动图结局的影响。主要终点是全因死亡率和心力衰竭住院的复合终点,次要终点是生活质量、6 分钟步行试验(6MWT)、QRS 持续时间、LV 收缩末期容积和 LV 射血分数。我们纳入了 8 项 RCT,共纳入 1323 名患者。6 项 RCT 比较了指导策略(n = 638)与常规策略(n = 468),2 项 RCT 比较了不同的指导策略:电(n = 111)与影像学(n = 106)引导。与常规策略相比,指导策略在 12-24 个月(RR 0.83,95%CI 0.52-1.33)时并未显著降低主要终点的风险。在 6 个月的随访中,与常规策略相比,指导策略可使 6MWT 距离略有改善,两组间的绝对差值为 18 米(95%CI 6-30),但其余次要终点没有改善。两种指导策略的次要终点均无差异。
在这项研究中,针对 LV 最晚激活部位的 CRT 植入策略并未改善生存率或减少心力衰竭住院。