A man aged 75 years and with nonischemic cardiomyopathy had implantation of a biventricular implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD). Consistent biventricular pacing was limited by intermittent T-wave oversensing (TWOS). A strategy of left-ventricular-only pacing was used to eliminate TWOS. This strategy obviates the need to reduce ventricular sensitivity and thus may be an effective alternative to biventricular pacing complicated by TWOS.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2012.06.005 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Biventricular versus left ventricular only stimulation: an echocardiographic substudy of the B-LEFT HF trial.
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown)
July 2023
CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France.
Background: The noninferiority of left ventricular pacing alone (LVp) compared with biventricular pacing (BIV) has not been yet definitely documented. In this study, we reviewed all the original echocardiographic measures of the Biventricular versus Left Univentricular Pacing with ICD Back-up in Heart Failure Patients (B-LEFT HF) trial in order to investigate mechanisms underlying LV remodelling with both pacing modalities.
Methods: Patients with New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA) III or IV despite optimal medical therapy, LVEF 35% or less, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) more than 55 mm, QRS duration at least 130 ms were randomized to BIV or LVp for 6 months.
Transhepatic Left Ventricular Only Pacing After Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Attempt with High Pacing Threshold.
Anatol J Cardiol
April 2023
Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Aims: The aim of the Mid-Q Response study is to test the hypothesis that adaptive preferential left ventricular-only pacing with the AdaptivCRT algorithm has superior clinical outcomes compared to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure (HF) patients with moderately wide QRS duration (≥120 ms and <150 ms), left bundle branch block (LBBB), and normal atrioventricular (AV) conduction (PR interval ≤200 ms).
Methods: This prospective, multi-center, randomized, controlled, clinical study is being conducted at approximately 60 centers in Asia. Following enrollment and baseline assessment, eligible patients are implanted with a CRT system equipped with the AdaptivCRT algorithm and are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to have AdaptivCRT ON (Adaptive Bi-V and LV pacing) or AdaptivCRT OFF (Nonadaptive CRT).
Impact of atrial septal pacing in left ventricular-only pacing in patients with a first-degree atrioventricular block: A case series.
HeartRhythm Case Rep
March 2022
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Centre, Osaka, Japan.
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Single Site Left Ventricular Pacing in a Tricuspid Atresia Patient With Left Bundle Branch Block.
CJC Pediatr Congenit Heart Dis
April 2022
Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Kanagawa Children's Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is typically achieved by pacing both ventricles. However, left ventricular-only pacing has been shown to be noninferior to biventricular pacing in patients with left bundle branch block and normal atrioventricular conduction. However, there is no evidence in favour of CRT with single-site pacing for patients with single-ventricle physiology.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!