Cargando…

Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices

BACKGROUND: The hemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are uncharacterized. We aimed to quantify the hemodynamic effects of different ventricular pacing configurations in patients with LVADs, focusing on short‐term changes in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomashitis, Brett, Baicu, Catalin F., Butschek, Ross A., Jackson, Gregory R., Winterfield, Jeffrey, Tedford, Ryan J., Zile, Michael R., Gold, Michael R., Houston, Brian A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174219/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33663225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.018127
_version_ 1783702860614074368
author Tomashitis, Brett
Baicu, Catalin F.
Butschek, Ross A.
Jackson, Gregory R.
Winterfield, Jeffrey
Tedford, Ryan J.
Zile, Michael R.
Gold, Michael R.
Houston, Brian A.
author_facet Tomashitis, Brett
Baicu, Catalin F.
Butschek, Ross A.
Jackson, Gregory R.
Winterfield, Jeffrey
Tedford, Ryan J.
Zile, Michael R.
Gold, Michael R.
Houston, Brian A.
author_sort Tomashitis, Brett
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The hemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are uncharacterized. We aimed to quantify the hemodynamic effects of different ventricular pacing configurations in patients with LVADs, focusing on short‐term changes in load‐independent right ventricular (RV) contractility. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with LVADs underwent right heart catheterization during spontaneous respiration without sedation and with pressures recorded at end expiration. Right heart catheterization was performed at different pacemaker configurations (biventricular pacing, left ventricular pacing, RV pacing, and unpaced conduction) in a randomly generated sequence with >3 minutes between configuration change and hemodynamic assessment. The right heart catheterization operator was blinded to the sequence. RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure was calculated from digitized hemodynamic waveforms, consistent with a previously validated protocol. Fifteen patients with LVADs who were in sinus rhythm were included. Load‐independent RV contractility, as assessed by RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure, was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (15.7±7.6 versus 11.0±4.0 s(−1); P=0.003). Thermodilution cardiac output was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (4.48±0.7 versus 4.38±0.8 L/min; P=0.05). There were no significant differences in heart rate, ventricular filling pressures, or atrioventricular valvular regurgitation across all pacing configurations. CONCLUSIONS: Biventricular pacing acutely improves load‐independent RV contractility in patients with LVADs. Even in these patients with mechanical left ventricular unloading via LVAD who were relative pacing nonresponders (required LVAD support despite cardiac resynchronization therapy), biventricular pacing was acutely beneficial to RV contractility.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8174219
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81742192021-06-11 Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices Tomashitis, Brett Baicu, Catalin F. Butschek, Ross A. Jackson, Gregory R. Winterfield, Jeffrey Tedford, Ryan J. Zile, Michael R. Gold, Michael R. Houston, Brian A. J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: The hemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are uncharacterized. We aimed to quantify the hemodynamic effects of different ventricular pacing configurations in patients with LVADs, focusing on short‐term changes in load‐independent right ventricular (RV) contractility. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with LVADs underwent right heart catheterization during spontaneous respiration without sedation and with pressures recorded at end expiration. Right heart catheterization was performed at different pacemaker configurations (biventricular pacing, left ventricular pacing, RV pacing, and unpaced conduction) in a randomly generated sequence with >3 minutes between configuration change and hemodynamic assessment. The right heart catheterization operator was blinded to the sequence. RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure was calculated from digitized hemodynamic waveforms, consistent with a previously validated protocol. Fifteen patients with LVADs who were in sinus rhythm were included. Load‐independent RV contractility, as assessed by RV maximal change in pressure over time normalized to instantaneous pressure, was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (15.7±7.6 versus 11.0±4.0 s(−1); P=0.003). Thermodilution cardiac output was higher in biventricular pacing compared with unpaced conduction (4.48±0.7 versus 4.38±0.8 L/min; P=0.05). There were no significant differences in heart rate, ventricular filling pressures, or atrioventricular valvular regurgitation across all pacing configurations. CONCLUSIONS: Biventricular pacing acutely improves load‐independent RV contractility in patients with LVADs. Even in these patients with mechanical left ventricular unloading via LVAD who were relative pacing nonresponders (required LVAD support despite cardiac resynchronization therapy), biventricular pacing was acutely beneficial to RV contractility. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8174219/ /pubmed/33663225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.018127 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Tomashitis, Brett
Baicu, Catalin F.
Butschek, Ross A.
Jackson, Gregory R.
Winterfield, Jeffrey
Tedford, Ryan J.
Zile, Michael R.
Gold, Michael R.
Houston, Brian A.
Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices
title Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices
title_full Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices
title_fullStr Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices
title_full_unstemmed Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices
title_short Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Versus Alternative Pacing Strategies in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices
title_sort acute hemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy versus alternative pacing strategies in patients with left ventricular assist devices
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174219/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33663225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.018127
work_keys_str_mv AT tomashitisbrett acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT baicucatalinf acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT butschekrossa acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT jacksongregoryr acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT winterfieldjeffrey acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT tedfordryanj acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT zilemichaelr acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT goldmichaelr acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices
AT houstonbriana acutehemodynamiceffectsofcardiacresynchronizationtherapyversusalternativepacingstrategiesinpatientswithleftventricularassistdevices