AI Article Synopsis

  • CRT significantly reduced septal wall thickness (SWT), posterior wall thickness (PWT), and left ventricular mass (LVM) more in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) compared to those with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) alone.
  • CRT-D patients with non-LBBB experienced less pronounced changes in LVM, but similar improvements in SWT and PWT as their LBBB counterparts.
  • In LBBB patients receiving CRT-D, reductions in SWT and LVM were linked to lower rates of heart failure and severe cardiac events, unlike non-LBBB patients, who did not show the same benefits.

Article Abstract

Background: The effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on left ventricular wall thickness and left ventricular mass (LVM) is unknown.

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of CRT on septal and posterior wall thickness (SWT and PWT) and LVM in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and non-LBBB vs implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients and to assess the relationship between CRT-induced changes and cardiac events.

Methods: We investigated 843 patients with LBBB and 366 patients with non-LBBB enrolled in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) trial to analyze changes in SWT, PWT, and LVM at 12 months and subsequent outcome. The primary end point was heart failure or death; secondary end points included ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or death.

Results: In LBBB patients, reduction in SWT, PWT, and LVM was more pronounced in CRT defibrillator (CRT-D) than in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (SWT:-6.7% ± 4.4% vs-1.0% ± 1.9%; PWT:-6.4% ± 4.3% vs-0.8% ± 1.9%; LVM:-23.6% ± 9.9% vs-5.1% ± 5.1%; P<.001 for all). In CRT-D patients with non-LBBB, LVM reduction was less pronounced; however, changes in SWT and PWT were comparable. Changes in LVM correlated with changes in left ventricular end-diastolic volume. In CRT-D patients with LBBB, reduction in SWT and LVM was associated with reduction in heart failure/death (SWT: hazard ratio 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.89-0.99 per percent change; P = .03) and ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation/death (SWT: hazard ratio 0.95; 95% confidence interval 0.91-1.00; P = .04). CRT-D patients with non-LBBB did not show favorable reduction in clinical or arrhythmic end points related to changes in SWT, PWT, or LVM.

Conclusions: CRT-D was associated with significant reduction in SWT, PWT, and LVM in patients with LBBB along with left ventricular volume changes and associated favorable clinical and arrhythmia outcomes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2012.11.007DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cardiac resynchronization
12
resynchronization therapy
12
left ventricular
12
wall thickness
12
swt pwt
12
pwt lvm
12
ventricular mass
8
heart failure
8
implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
8
patients
6

Similar Publications

Background: Non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important issue in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and non-left bundle branch block (LBBB). Electrocardiogram-gated myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography imaging (G-MPI SPECT) is typically used to assess left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony. This study aimed to determine whether G-MPI parameters are associated with non-responsiveness to CRT.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) offers significant benefits in symptom alleviation, reduction of rehospitalization rates, and overall survival of patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (rEF). However, despite its proven efficacy, precisely identifying suitable CRT candidates remains a challenge, with a notable proportion of patients experiencing non-response. Accordingly, many attempts have been made to enhance patient selection, and to identify the best imaging parameters to predict the response and survival after CRT implantation.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Left bundle branch block - innocent bystander, silent menace, or both.

Heart Rhythm

December 2024

Christian-Albrechts-University, Medical Faculty, Christian-Albrechts-Platz 4, 24118 Kiel, Germany; University of Applied Science, Life Sciences, An der Karlstadt 8, 27568 Bremerhaven, Germany. Electronic address:

Left bundle branch block (LBBB) causes immediate electrical and mechanical dys-synchrony of the left ventricle (LV) and gradual structural damages in the Purkinje cells and myocardium. Mechanical dys-synchrony reduces the LV ejection fraction (EF) instantly, but only to ≈55% in an otherwise normal heart. Because of the heart's in-built functional redundancy, a patient with LBBB does not always notice the heart's reduced efficiency straight away.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Existing techniques for pacing the right ventricle and providing cardiac resynchronization therapy through biventricular pacing are not effective in restoring damage to the conduction system. Therefore, the need for new pacing modalities and techniques with more sensible designs and algorithms is justified. Although the benefits of conduction system pacing (CSP), which mainly include His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), are evident in patients who require conduction system recuperation, the critical criteria for left CSP remain unclear, and the roles of different pacing modalities of CSP for cardiac resynchronization are not definite.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want 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!