Author/Authors :
Ploux، نويسنده , , Sylvain and Lumens، نويسنده , , Joost and Whinnett، نويسنده , , Zachary and Montaudon، نويسنده , , Michel and Strom، نويسنده , , Maria and Ramanathan، نويسنده , , Charu and Derval، نويسنده , , Nicolas and Zemmoura، نويسنده , , Adlane and Denis، نويسنده , , Arnaud and De Guillebon، نويسنده , , Maxime and Shah، نويسنده , , Ashok and Hocini، نويسنده , , Meleze and Jais، نويسنده , , Pierre and Ritter، نويسنده , , Philippe and Haissaguerre، نويسنده , , Michel and Wilkoff، نويسنده , , Bruce L. and Bordachar، نويسنده , , Pierre، نويسنده ,
Abstract :
Objectives
tudy sought to investigate whether noninvasive electrocardiographic activation mapping is a useful method for predicting response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).
ound
ird of the patients appear not to respond to CRT when they are selected according to QRS duration.
s
formed electrocardiographic activation mapping in 33 consecutive CRT candidates (QRS duration ≥120 ms). In 18 patients, the 12-lead electrocardiographic morphology was left bundle branch block (LBBB), and in 15, it was nonspecific intraventricular conduction disturbance (NICD). Three indexes of electrical dyssynchrony were derived from intrinsic maps: right and left ventricular total activation times and ventricular electrical uncoupling (VEU) (difference between the left ventricular [LV] and right ventricular mean activation times). We assessed the ability of these parameters to predict response, measured using a clinical composite score, after 6 months of CRT.
s
ocardiographic maps revealed homogeneous patterns of activation and consistently greater VEU and LV total activation time (LVTAT) in patients with LBBB compared with heterogeneous activation sequences and shorter VEU and LVTAT in NICD patients (VEU: 75 ± 12 ms vs. 40 ± 22 ms; p < 0.001; LVTAT: 115 ± 21 ms vs. 91 ± 34 ms; p = 0.03). LBBB and NICD patients had similar right ventricular total activation times (62 ± 30 ms vs. 58 ± 26 ms; p = 0.7). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve indicated that VEU (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.88) was significantly superior to QRS duration (AUC: 0.73) and LVTAT (AUC: 0.72) for predicting CRT response (p < 0.05). With a 50-ms cutoff value, VEU identified CRT responders with 90% sensitivity and 82% specificity whether LBBB was present or not.
sions
cular electrical uncoupling measured by electrocardiographic mapping predicted clinical CRT response better than QRS duration or the presence of LBBB.
Keywords :
cardiac resynchronization therapy , electrical dyssynchrony , electrocardiography , ventricular mapping , Heart Failure