Long‐Term Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Apical Versus Nonapical Left Ventricular Pacing

Francisco Leyva-Leon, Abbasin Zegard, Robin J. Taylor, Paul W.X. Foley, Fraz Umar, Kiran Patel, Jonathan R. Panting, Peter van Dam, Frits Prinzen, Howard Marshall, Tian Qui

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background
Experimental evidence indicates that left ventricular (LV) apical pacing is hemodynamically superior to nonapical LV pacing. Some studies have shown that an LV apical lead position is unfavorable in cardiac resynchronization therapy. We sought to determine whether an apical LV lead position influences cardiac mortality after cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Methods and Results
In this retrospective observational study, the primary end point of cardiac mortality was assessed in relation to longitudinal (basal, midventricular, or apical) and circumferential (anterior, lateral, or posterior) LV lead positions, as well as right ventricular (apical or septal), assigned using fluoroscopy. Lead positions were assessed in 1189 patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation over 15 years. After a median follow‐up of 6.0 years (interquartile range: 4.4–7.7 years), an apical LV lead position was associated with lower cardiac mortality than a nonapical position (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–0.99) after covariate adjustment. There were no differences in total mortality or heart failure hospitalization. Death from pump failure was lower with apical than nonapical positions (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.51–0.94). Compared with a basal position, an apical LV position was also associated with lower risk of sudden cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.13–0.93). No differences emerged between circumferential LV lead positions or right ventricular positions with respect to any end point.

Conclusions
In recipients of cardiac resynchronization therapy, an apical LV lead position was associated with better long‐term cardiac survival than a nonapical position. This effect was due to a lower risk of pump failure and sudden cardiac death.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere008508
JournalJournal of the American Heart Association
Volume7
Issue number16
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 14 Aug 2018

Bibliographical note

© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association,
Inc., by Wiley. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Long‐Term Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Apical Versus Nonapical Left Ventricular Pacing'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Leyva-Leon, F., Zegard, A., Taylor, R. J., Foley, P. W. X., Umar, F., Patel, K., Panting, J. R., van Dam, P., Prinzen, F., Marshall, H., & Qui, T. (2018). Long‐Term Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Apical Versus Nonapical Left Ventricular Pacing. Journal of the American Heart Association, 7(16), [e008508]. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.008508