Abstract:Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapeutic option in symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and evidence of left ventricular (LV) conduction delay (QRS width ≥120 ms), especially when typical left bundle branch block is present. The rationale behind CRT is restoration of aberrant LV electrical activation. As there is considerable heterogeneity of the LV electrical activation pattern among CRT candidates, an individualized approach with targeting of the LV lead in the region of latest electrical activation while avoiding scar tissue may enhance CRT response. Echocardiography, electro anatomic mapping, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with late gadolinium enhancement are helpful to guide such targeted LV lead placement. However, an important limitation remains the anatomy of the coronary sinus, which often does not allow concordant LV lead placement in the optimal region. Epicardial LV lead placement through minimal invasive surgery or endocardial LV lead placement through transseptal punction may overcome this limitation, obviously with an increased complication risk. Furthermore, recent pacing algorithms suggest superiority of LV-only versus biventricular pacing in patients with preserved atrio ventricular (AV) conduction and a typical LBBB pattern. Finally, pacing from only one LV site might not overcome the wide electrical dispersion often seen in patients with LV conduction delays. Therefore, multisite pacing has gained significant interest to improve CRT response. The use of multiple LV leads may potentially lead to more favorable reverse remodeling, improved functional capacity and quality of life in CRT candidates, but adverse events and a shorter battery span are more frequent because of the extra lead. The use of one multipolar LV lead increases the number of pacing configurations within the same coronary sinus side branch (within small distances from each other) without the use of an additional lead. Small observational studies suggest that more effective resynchronization can be achieved with this approach. Finally, there are many reasons for non effective CRT delivery in carefully selected patients with an adequately implanted device. Multidisciplinary, post implantation care inside a dedicated CRT clinic ensures optimal CRT delivery, improves response rate and should be considered standard of care.

Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Left Ventricular Quadripolar Leads.

Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead in 20 Cases with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

The clinical effect of quadripolar left ventricular lead in CRT therapy

Application of quadripolar LV lead in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Clinical evaluation of quadripolar left ventricular leads in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients With Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Using Left Bundle Branch Pacing

The Clinic Effect of Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

A meta-analysis of cardiac resynchronization therapy with quadripolar versus bipolar left ventricular leads on outcomes

[Factors Associated with the Efficacy of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure].

Clinical Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization with Epicardial Left Ventricular Lead

Predictors for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy by Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients with Heart Failure and Left Bundle Branch Block

Retrospective analysis of application of left ventricular active fixation lead in 26 cases

Conduction system pacing in cardiac resynchronization: short-mid term follow-up

Multipoint pacing by a left ventricular quadripolar lead improves the acute hemodynamic response to CRT compared with conventional biventricular pacing at any site.

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Complete Heart Block: A Single Or Multipoint Approach To Improve Heart Failure Outcomes

GW28-e1234 Impact of Different Left Ventricular Pacing Sites on Clinical Outcome of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Hemodynamic comparison of different multisites and multipoint pacing strategies in cardiac resynchronization therapies

Effects of right ventricular lead location on outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy

Optimizing CRT - Do We Need More Leads and Delivery Methods

Long-term efficacy of cardiac resynchronization therapy with triple-site ventricular stimulation in heart failure patients