Left Ventricular Lead Position and Clinical Outcome in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial–Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) Trial
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 22 March 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Circulation
- Vol. 123 (11), 1159-1166
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.110.000646
Abstract
Background—: An important determinant of successful cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure is the position of the left ventricular (LV) pacing lead. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the LV lead position on outcome in patients randomized to cardiac resynchronization-defibrillation in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial–Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) study. Methods and Results—: The location of the LV lead was assessed by means of coronary venograms and chest x-rays recorded at the time of device implantation. The LV lead location was classified along the short axis into an anterior, lateral, or posterior position and along the long axis into a basal, midventricular, or apical region. The primary end point of MADIT-CRT was heart failure (HF) hospitalization or death, whichever came first. The LV lead position was assessed in 799 patients, (55% patients ≥65 years of age, 26% female, 10% LV ejection fraction ≤25%, 55% ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 71% left bundle-branch block) with a follow-up of 29±11 months. The extent of cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit was similar for leads in the anterior, lateral, or posterior position ( P =0.652). The apical lead location compared with leads located in the nonapical position (basal or midventricular region) was associated with a significantly increased risk for heart failure/death (hazard ratio=1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.09 to 2.71; P =0.019) after adjustment for the clinical covariates. The apical lead position was also associated with an increased risk for death (hazard ratio=2.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.42 to 5.97; P =0.004). Conclusion—: LV leads positioned in the apical region were associated with an unfavorable outcome, suggesting that this lead location should be avoided in cardiac resynchronization therapy. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00180271.This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy for the Prevention of Heart-Failure EventsThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Guidelines for cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: The Task Force for Cardiac Pacing and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in Collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm AssociationEuropean Heart Journal, 2007
- Left ventricular lead electrical delay predicts response to cardiac resynchronization therapyHeart Rhythm, 2006
- Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Improves Heart Rate Profile and Heart Rate Variability of Patients With Moderate to Severe Heart FailureJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2005
- Cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy: results from the CARE-HF trialEuropean Heart Journal, 2005
- The Effect of Cardiac Resynchronization on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart FailureThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy with or without an Implantable Defibrillator in Advanced Chronic Heart FailureThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Cardiac Resynchronization in Chronic Heart FailureThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- long-term clinical effect of hemodynamically optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure and ventricular conduction delayJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2002
- Effect of Resynchronization Therapy Stimulation Site on the Systolic Function of Heart Failure PatientsCirculation, 2001