Endocardial pacing results in better electrical resynchronization and hemodynamic improvement than epicardial pacing in CRT

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): The original study was financially supported by Medtronic (Minneapolis, Minnesota). The investigation of the current abstract is unrelated to the original financial support. Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is conventionally applied by means of a transvenous epicardial left ventricular (LV) lead. Studies suggest that endocardial LV pacing may result in better resynchronization and LV function than epicardial LV pacing. Purpose To investigate whether endocardial pacing results in better electrical resynchronization and hemodynamic improvement compared to epicardial pacing. Methods Patients with an indication for CRT were prospectively included from two hospitals. In all patients, LV pacing was performed endocardially and epicardially in the postero-lateral region. QRS area was calculated from vectorcardiograms that were synthesized from 12-lead ECGs. Acute hemodynamic improvement was assessed as the change in maximum rate of rise of LV-pressure (%ΔLVdP/dtmax). We assessed the effects of endocardial and epicardial LV pacing on the change in QRS area (∆QRS area) and LVdP/dtmax (%ΔLVdP/dtmax). Results A total of 16 patients (age 66 ± 11 years, 56% male, 31% ischemic cardiomyopathy, QRS duration 166±18ms, LBBB in 88%) were included. Endocardial pacing resulted in greater ∆QRS area than epicardial pacing (-51 ± 34 µVs vs. -24 ± 37 µVs, p = 0.021, Panel A). In addition, endocardial pacing led to a larger %ΔLVdP/dtmax as compared to epicardial pacing (21 ± 12% vs. 18 ± 9%, p = 0.025, Panel B). Conclusion Compared to conventional epicardial LV pacing in CRT, endocardial LV pacing results in better electrical resynchronization and acute hemodynamic improvement.