HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: hrt.2006.106369v1 94/1/53    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lane, R E Articles by Chow, A W C Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lane, R E Articles by Chow, A W C Topic Collections Relevant Article

Comparison of temporary bifocal right ventricular pacing and biventricular pacing for heart failure: evaluation by tissue Doppler imaging

¹ Waller Cardiac Unit, International Centre for Circulatory Health, St Mary’s Hospital and Imperial College of Medicine, London, UK
² The Heart Hospital, UCLH, Westmoreland Street, London, UK

Correspondence to:
Dr Anthony W C Chow, The Heart Hospital, 16–18 Westmoreland Street, London W1G 8PH, UK; anthony.chow{at}uclh.nhs.uk

ABSTRACT
Background: The complications and limitations of biventricular pacing largely relate to left ventricular (LV) pacing. An alternative approach was tested of simultaneously pacing the right ventricular (RV) apex and outflow tract (RVOT) or using bifocal right ventricular pacing (BRVP) to provide cardiac resynchronisation.

Methods: 21 consecutive patients with heart failure and severely impaired left ventricular function were studied. Ejection fraction and tissue Doppler data were collected at baseline, during BRVP, and during biventricular pacing, using a temporary pacing protocol.

Results: BRVP was achieved in all patients without complication. BRVP significantly reduced mean baseline intra-LV, inter-LV–RV, and global mechanical dyssynchrony from (mean (SD)) 71 (35) to 44 (18) ms, p = 0.003; 86 (42) to 57 (33) ms, p = 0.029; and 157 (67) to 101 (42) ms, p = 0.005, respectively. It increased the ejection fraction from 21 (8)% to 29 (7)%, p = 0.002. Compared with BRVP, reductions in intra-LV, inter-LV–RV, and global mechanical dyssynchrony were superior with biventricular pacing (31 (12) ms, p = 0.014; 36 (27) ms, p = 0.008; and 67 (34) ms, p = 0.01 compared with BRVP, respectively); improvements in ejection fraction were similar (26 (9)%, NS).

Conclusions: In patients with heart failure, superior mechanical resynchronisation is achieved with biventricular pacing compared with BRVP. BRVP may be useful when left ventricular lead placement is not possible.

Keywords: biventricular pacing; bifocal right ventricular pacing; ventricular dyssynchrony; tissue Doppler imaging

Relevant Article

Pacing in heart failure: how many leads and where?

S Serge Barold and Bengt Herwerg
Heart 2008 94: 10-12. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S S. Barold and B. Herwerg Pacing in heart failure: how many leads and where? Heart, January 1, 2008; 94(1): 10 - 12. [Full Text] [PDF]