Planning and Guidance of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy–Lead Implantation by Evaluating Coronary Venous Anatomy Assessed with Multidetector Computed Tomography

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the utility of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in preoperative planning of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation. BACKGROUND: Variation in coronary venous anatomy can affect optimal lead placement and may warrant preimplantation visualization prior to CRT lead placement. METHODS: Prospective randomized enrollment of 29 patients (17 males; mean age at implant 66.7 ± 12.8 years) was undertaken. Patients were randomized to preimplantation MDCT (GE(®) 64-detector Lightspeed, n = 16) or no MDCT. Implantation was planned based on three-dimensional coronary venous reconstruction as visualized in the CT group. Measurement of coronary sinus (CS) angulation, CS ostial (os) diameter, right atrial (RA) width, volume, and height was undertaken prior to implant. Intraoperative CS lead implantation times (introduction, cannulation, and left ventricular [LV] lead positioning), procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and venogram contrast volume were measured to determine if there was a difference between patients who underwent preimplant CT scan and those who did not. RESULTS: CS os diameter (mean = 13.8 ± 2.9 cm) was inversely correlated with total fluoroscopy time (r = −0.57, P = .008), and total procedure time, but this correlation was not statistically significant (r = −0.36, P = 0.12). RA width (mean = 52.8 ± 9.9 cm) was associated with a shorter total procedure time (r = −0.44, P = .047) and LV lead positioning time (r = −0.33, P = .012). There were no statistically significant differences between the CT group and the non-CT group with respect to total intraoperative and fluoroscopy times or venogram contrast volumes. Total procedure time was longer in the CT group but the difference was not statistically significant (94 ± 27.2 vs. 74.7 ± 26.6; P = .065). CONCLUSION: Noninvasive visualization of the coronary venous anatomy before CRT implantation can be used as a guide for lead placement. While no significant differences were noted between the two groups with respect to intraoperative variables, CS os diameter and RA width inversely correlated to a shorter procedure time and LV lead positioning time, respectively. Further clinical trials regarding the utility of MDCT to visualize coronary venous anatomy prior to CRT implantation for procedural planning and lead placement guidance are warranted.