Dr. Antonio Raviele,
At present, up to 30-40% of patients do not show improvement in left ventricular (LV) performance or clinical symptoms after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). This suboptimal response may be secondary to several factors, such as lack of baseline LV mechanical dyssynchrony, presence of substantial scar, non-optimal LV lead position, atrio-ventricular (AV) dyssynchrony or persistence of LV dyssynchrony after CRT.
Thus, there is a need in clinical practice to extend the benefit of CRT to a larger proportion of patients. But, what is the best way to optimize CRT response? This has been debated in an interesting symposium held at 2013 ESC Congress.
The main conclusions and messages of the Symposium are:
However, Derek Exner from Calgary, Canada outlined that current evidence does not support AV and VV interval optimization routinely in all patients receiving CRT. Only clinical non-responders to the usual modality of CRT pacing (consisting in simultaneous biventricular pacing with a fixed 100-120 ms interval) really need to undergo an optimization procedure.
This is in agreement with the 2013 Guidelines on cardiac pacing and CRT.
ESC Congress 2013Session Title: What is the best way to optimise cardiac resynchronisation therapy response?
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
© 2017 European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved