Cargando…
Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
AIMS: Multi-lead pacing is a potential therapy to improve response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) by providing rapid activation of the myocardium from multiple sites. Here, we perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy of multi-lead pacing. METHODS AND...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9242027/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35919119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjopen/oeac013 |
_version_ | 1784737963985338368 |
---|---|
author | Elliott, Mark K Mehta, Vishal Wijesuriya, Nadeev Sidhu, Baldeep S Gould, Justin Niederer, Steven Rinaldi, Christopher A |
author_facet | Elliott, Mark K Mehta, Vishal Wijesuriya, Nadeev Sidhu, Baldeep S Gould, Justin Niederer, Steven Rinaldi, Christopher A |
author_sort | Elliott, Mark K |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: Multi-lead pacing is a potential therapy to improve response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) by providing rapid activation of the myocardium from multiple sites. Here, we perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy of multi-lead pacing. METHODS AND RESULTS: A literature search was performed which identified 251 unique records. After screening, 6 studies were found to meet inclusion criteria, with 415 patients included in the meta-analysis. Four studies performed multi-lead pacing with two left ventricular (LV) leads and one right ventricular (RV) lead. One study used two RV leads and one LV lead, and one study used both configurations. There was no difference between multi-lead pacing and conventional CRT in LV end-systolic volume [mean difference (MD) −0.54 mL, P = 0.93] or LV ejection fraction (MD 1.42%, P = 0.40). There was a borderline significant improvement in Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire score for multi-lead pacing vs. conventional CRT (MD −4.46, P = 0.05), but the difference was not significant when only patients receiving LV-only multi-lead pacing were included (MD −3.59, P = 0.25). There was also no difference between groups for 6-min walk test (MD 15.06 m, P = 0.38) or New York Heart Association class at follow-up [odds ratio (OR) 1.49, P = 0.24]. There was no difference in mortality between groups (OR 1.11, P = 0.77). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis does not support the use of multi-lead pacing for CRT delivery. However, significant variation between studies was noted, and therefore a benefit for multi-lead pacing in select patients cannot be excluded, and further investigation may be warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9242027 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92420272022-08-01 Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Elliott, Mark K Mehta, Vishal Wijesuriya, Nadeev Sidhu, Baldeep S Gould, Justin Niederer, Steven Rinaldi, Christopher A Eur Heart J Open Original Article AIMS: Multi-lead pacing is a potential therapy to improve response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) by providing rapid activation of the myocardium from multiple sites. Here, we perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy of multi-lead pacing. METHODS AND RESULTS: A literature search was performed which identified 251 unique records. After screening, 6 studies were found to meet inclusion criteria, with 415 patients included in the meta-analysis. Four studies performed multi-lead pacing with two left ventricular (LV) leads and one right ventricular (RV) lead. One study used two RV leads and one LV lead, and one study used both configurations. There was no difference between multi-lead pacing and conventional CRT in LV end-systolic volume [mean difference (MD) −0.54 mL, P = 0.93] or LV ejection fraction (MD 1.42%, P = 0.40). There was a borderline significant improvement in Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire score for multi-lead pacing vs. conventional CRT (MD −4.46, P = 0.05), but the difference was not significant when only patients receiving LV-only multi-lead pacing were included (MD −3.59, P = 0.25). There was also no difference between groups for 6-min walk test (MD 15.06 m, P = 0.38) or New York Heart Association class at follow-up [odds ratio (OR) 1.49, P = 0.24]. There was no difference in mortality between groups (OR 1.11, P = 0.77). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis does not support the use of multi-lead pacing for CRT delivery. However, significant variation between studies was noted, and therefore a benefit for multi-lead pacing in select patients cannot be excluded, and further investigation may be warranted. Oxford University Press 2022-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9242027/ /pubmed/35919119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjopen/oeac013 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Elliott, Mark K Mehta, Vishal Wijesuriya, Nadeev Sidhu, Baldeep S Gould, Justin Niederer, Steven Rinaldi, Christopher A Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title | Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full | Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_short | Multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_sort | multi-lead pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9242027/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35919119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjopen/oeac013 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elliottmarkk multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT mehtavishal multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT wijesuriyanadeev multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT sidhubaldeeps multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT gouldjustin multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT niederersteven multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT rinaldichristophera multileadpacingforcardiacresynchronizationtherapyinheartfailureametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |