Dataset Information

Comparative electromechanical and hemodynamic effects of left ventricular and biventricular pacing in dyssynchronous heart failure: electrical resynchronization versus left-right ventricular interaction.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to enhance understanding of the working mechanism of cardiac resynchronization therapy by comparing animal experimental, clinical, and computational data on the hemodynamic and electromechanical consequences of left ventricular pacing (LVP) and biventricular pacing (BiVP).It is unclear why LVP and BiVP have comparative positive effects on hemodynamic function of patients with dyssynchronous heart failure.Hemodynamic response to LVP and BiVP (% change in maximal rate of left ventricular pressure rise [LVdP/dtmax]) was measured in 6 dogs and 24 patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block followed by computer simulations of local myofiber mechanics during LVP and BiVP in the failing heart with left bundle branch block. Pacing-induced changes of electrical activation were measured in dogs using contact mapping and in patients using a noninvasive multielectrode electrocardiographic mapping technique.LVP and BiVP similarly increased LVdP/dtmax in dogs and in patients, but only BiVP significantly decreased electrical dyssynchrony. In the simulations, LVP and BiVP increased total ventricular myofiber work to the same extent. While the LVP-induced increase was entirely due to enhanced right ventricular (RV) myofiber work, the BiVP-induced increase was due to enhanced myofiber work of both the left ventricle (LV) and RV. Overall, LVdP/dtmax correlated better with total ventricular myofiber work than with LV or RV myofiber work alone.Animal experimental, clinical, and computational data support the similarity of hemodynamic response to LVP and BiVP, despite differences in electrical dyssynchrony. The simulations provide the novel insight that, through ventricular interaction, the RV myocardium importantly contributes to the improvement in LV pump function induced by cardiac resynchronization therapy.

SUBMITTER: Lumens J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3985285 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative electromechanical and hemodynamic effects of left ventricular and biventricular pacing in dyssynchronous heart failure: electrical resynchronization versus left-right ventricular interaction.

Lumens Joost J Ploux Sylvain S Strik Marc M Gorcsan John J Cochet Hubert H Derval Nicolas N Strom Maria M Ramanathan Charu C Ritter Philippe P Haïssaguerre Michel M Jaïs Pierre P Arts Theo T Delhaas Tammo T Prinzen Frits W FW Bordachar Pierre P

Journal of the American College of Cardiology 20130904 25

<h4>Objectives</h4>The purpose of this study was to enhance understanding of the working mechanism of cardiac resynchronization therapy by comparing animal experimental, clinical, and computational data on the hemodynamic and electromechanical consequences of left ventricular pacing (LVP) and biventricular pacing (BiVP).<h4>Background</h4>It is unclear why LVP and BiVP have comparative positive effects on hemodynamic function of patients with dyssynchronous heart failure.<h4>Methods</h4>Hemodyna ...[more]

PMID: 24013057

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background The hemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are uncharacterized. We aimed to quantify the hemodynamic effects of different ventricular pacing configurations in patients with LVADs, focusing on short-term changes in load-independent right ventricular (RV) contractility. Methods and Results Patients with LVADs underwent right heart catheterization during spontaneous respiration without sedation and with pressures recorded at end expiration. Right heart catheterization was performed at different pacemaker configurations (biventricular pacing, left ventricular pacing, RV pacing, and unpaced conduction) in a randomly generated sequence with >3 minutes between configuration change and hemodynamic assessment. The right heart catheterization operator was blinded to the sequence. RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure was calculated from digitized hemodynamic waveforms, consistent with a previously validated protocol. Fifteen patients with LVADs who were in sinus rhythm were included. Load-independent RV contractility, as assessed by RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure, was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (15.7±7.6 versus 11.0±4.0 s-1; P=0.003). Thermodilution cardiac output was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (4.48±0.7 versus 4.38±0.8 L/min; P=0.05). There were no significant differences in heart rate, ventricular filling pressures, or atrioventricular valvular regurgitation across all pacing configurations. Conclusions Biventricular pacing acutely improves load-independent RV contractility in patients with LVADs. Even in these patients with mechanical left ventricular unloading via LVAD who were relative pacing nonresponders (required LVAD support despite cardiac resynchronization therapy), biventricular pacing was acutely beneficial to RV contractility.

Project description:Guidelines recommend patients undergoing a first pacemaker implant who have even mild left ventricular (LV) impairment should receive biventricular or conduction system pacing (CSP). There is no corresponding recommendation for patients who already have a pacemaker. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing device upgrades. The primary outcome was the echocardiographic change in LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Six RCTs (randomizing 161 patients) and 47 observational studies (2644 patients) assessing the efficacy of upgrade to biventricular pacing were eligible for analysis. Eight observational studies recruiting 217 patients of CSP upgrade were also eligible. Fourteen additional studies contributed data on complications (25 412 patients). Randomized controlled trials of biventricular pacing upgrade showed LVEF improvement of +8.4% from 35.5% and observational studies: +8.4% from 25.7%. Observational studies of left bundle branch area pacing upgrade showed +11.1% improvement from 39.0% and observational studies of His bundle pacing upgrade showed +12.7% improvement from 36.0%. New York Heart Association class decreased by -0.4, -0.8, -1.0, and -1.2, respectively. Randomized controlled trials of biventricular upgrade found improvement in Minnesota Heart Failure Score (-6.9 points) and peak oxygen uptake (+1.1 mL/kg/min). This was also seen in observational studies of biventricular upgrades (-19.67 points and +2.63 mL/kg/min, respectively). In studies of the biventricular upgrade, complication rates averaged 2% for pneumothorax, 1.4% for tamponade, and 3.7% for infection over 24 months of mean follow-up. Lead-related complications occurred in 3.3% of biventricular upgrades and 1.8% of CSP upgrades. Randomized controlled trials show significant physiological and symptomatic benefits of upgrading pacemakers to biventricular pacing. Observational studies show similar effects between biventricular pacing upgrade and CSP upgrade.

Project description:Cardiac dyssynchrony is the proposed mechanism for pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy, which can be prevented by biventricular pacing. Left bundle branch pacing and His bundle pacing are novel interventions that imitate the natural conduction of the heart with, theoretically, less interventricular dyssynchrony. One of the surrogate markers of interventricular synchrony is QRS duration. Our study aimed to compare the change of QRS duration before and after implantation between types of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs): left bundle branch pacing versus His bundle pacing versus biventricular pacing and conventional right ventricular pacing. A literature search for studies that reported an interval change of QRS duration after CIED implantation was conducted utilizing the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. All relevant works from database inception through November 2020 were included in this analysis. A random-effects model, Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to analyze QRS duration changes (eg, electrical cardiac synchronization) across different CIED implantations. The mean study sample size, from 14 included studies, was 185 subjects. The search found 707 articles. After exclusions, 14 articles remained with 2,054 patients. The His bundle pacing intervention resulted in the most dramatic decline in QRS duration (mean difference, - 53 ms; 95% CI - 67, - 39), followed by left bundle branch pacing (mean difference, - 46 ms; 95% CI - 60, - 33), and biventricular pacing (mean difference, - 19 ms; 95% CI - 37, - 1.8), when compared to conventional right ventricle apical pacing. When compared between LBBP and HBP, showed no statistically significant wider QRS duration in LBBP with mean different 6.5 ms. (95% CI - 6.7, 21). Our network meta-analysis found that physiologic pacing has the greatest effect on QRS duration after implantation. Thus, HBP and LBBP showed no significant difference between QRS duration after implantation. Physiologic pacing interventions result in improved electrocardiography markers of cardiac synchrony, narrower QRS duration, and might lower electromechanical dyssynchrony.

Dataset Information

Comparative electromechanical and hemodynamic effects of left ventricular and biventricular pacing in dyssynchronous heart failure: electrical resynchronization versus left-right ventricular interaction.

Publications

Comparative electromechanical and hemodynamic effects of left ventricular and biventricular pacing in dyssynchronous heart failure: electrical resynchronization versus left-right ventricular interaction.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets