Effect of ventricular leads position on the clinic outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

The RV lead position, either RVA or RVHS appears to make no difference in the response to CRT but the LV lead placement play a vital role.9,30 The latest activated regions of LV or areas without transmural myocardial scar for an optimal CRT are preferred. Currently, data demonstrate that no significant difference of clinical outcomes in posterior, anterior, and lateral LV lead position was found, while the ideal pacing site of the LV should be avoided in the apex position as suggested in COMPANION trial and MADIT-CRT trial.

[Effects of ventricular demand and dual-chamber pacing models on the long-term clinical outcome and cardiac remodeling in patients with symptomatic bradycardia].

Objective: To assess the effects of VVI (ventricular demand) and DDD (dual-chamber) pacing models on cardiac remodeling and the long-term clinical outcome of patients with symptomatic bradycardia.

Methods: All patients with DDD and VVI pacing models at our hospital from January 1991 to January 2003 were retrospectively analyzed.

Results: After a follow-up period of over 8 years in DDD and VVI groups (97 ± 27, 107 ± 44 months), left atrial diameter [(45 ± 12) mm vs (39 ± 12) mm, P < 0.