Should a Patient with Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction, Congestive Heart Failure, and Right Bundle Branch Block QRS Receive Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy?

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-168
Author(s):  
Christine M. Tompkins ◽  
Wojciech Zareba
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Right Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Ventricular Dysfunction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction ◽  
Bundle Branch Block

scholarly journals His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy in a patient with heart failure and right bundle branch block: a case report

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro Volkov ◽  
Dmytro Lopin ◽  
Stanislav Rybchynskyi ◽  
Dmytro Skoryi
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Right Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Abstract Background  Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an option for treatment for chronic heart failure (HF) associated with left bundle branch block (LBBB). Patients with HF and right bundle branch block (RBBB) have potentially worse outcomes in comparison to LBBB. Traditional CRT in RBBB can increase mortality and HF deterioration rates over native disease progression. His bundle pacing may improve the results of CRT in those patients. Furthermore, atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) for rate control in atrial fibrillation (AF) can be challenging in patients with previously implanted leads in His region. Case summary  We report the case of 74-year-old gentleman with a 5-year history of HF, permanent AF with a rapid ventricular response, and RBBB. He was admitted to the hospital with complaints of severe weakness and shortness of breath. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was decreased (41%), right ventricle (RV) was dilated (41 mm), and QRS was prolonged (200 ms) with RBBB morphology. The patient underwent His-optimized CRT with further left-sided AVNA. As a result, LVEF increased to 51%, RV dimensions decreased to 35 mm with an improvement of the clinical status during a 6-month follow-up. Discussion  Patients with AF, RBBB, and HF represent the least evaluated clinical subgroup of individuals with less beneficial clinical outcomes according to CRT studies. Achieving the most effective resynchronization could require pacing fusion from sites beyond traditional with the intention to recruit intrinsic conduction pathways. This approach can be favourable for reducing RV dilatation, improving LVEF, and maximizing electrical resynchronization.

Abstract P64: Right Ventricular Outflow Septal Pacing as Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Right Bundle-Branch Block: Results in 62 Patients

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip E Schrumpf ◽  
Michael Giudici ◽  
Deborah Paul ◽  
Roselyn Krupa ◽  
Cynthia Meirbachtol
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Right Ventricular ◽  
Right Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Qrs Complex ◽  
Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Ventricular Performance ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Qrs Duration

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy has been shown to improve left ventricular performance in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and a left-sided interventricular conduction delay. This is performed by placing a pacing lead on the lateral left ventricular wall to stimulate the area normally stimulated by the left bundle branch. In patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB), pacing the right bundle branch could also result in resynchronization. Previous studies have shown that right ventricular outflow septal (RVOS) pacing does, in fact, utilize the native conduction system. Methods: 62 consecutive patients, 46 male/16 female, aged 75 +/− 10.5 yr, with RBBB and indications for pacing, underwent RVOS lead placement using commercially available pacing systems. The patients subsequently underwent bedside A-V optimization to achieve the narrowest QRS duration and most “normal” QRS complex. Echocardiography was performed to evaluate changes in wall motion comparing baseline with optimal pacing. Results: Baseline mean QRS duration 146 +/− 20.9 ms Optimized mean QRS duration 111 +/− 20.5 ms Average decrease in QRS duration -35 +/− 21.5 ms p < 0.001 Echocardiography demonstrated improvement in septal contraction abnormalities. Conclusions: 1) RVOS pacing in RBBB patients can significantly narrow the QRS complex on ECG. 2) Septal contraction abnormalities due to RBBB can be improved with RVOS pacing and optimal A-V timing. 3) Further studies are warranted to evaluate this therapy in a heart failure population.

scholarly journals Cardiac resynchronization therapy system implantation complications

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-15
Author(s):  
Svetoslav Iovev ◽  
Peyo Zhivkov ◽  
Mariana Konteva
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Coronary Sinus ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Successful Therapy ◽  
Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Established Method

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using coronary sinus (CS) leads is an established method for the therapy of congestive heart failure (CHF) in the case of asynchronous ventricular contractions. Successful therapy depends on the placement of left ventricular leads usually via the coronary sinus (CS), a technically more challenging procedure than regular pacemaker implantations. Without specifi c precautions CRT implantation can be the gateway to a time-consuming nightmare. Therefore, CS lead implantation methods, with a focus on complications, were reviewed according to the literature and our own experience with approximately 4500 procedures from 2002-2021.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document