Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Heart failure wikipedia , lookup
Electrocardiography wikipedia , lookup
Remote ischemic conditioning wikipedia , lookup
Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia wikipedia , lookup
Management of acute coronary syndrome wikipedia , lookup
Cardiac surgery wikipedia , lookup
1423, either, cat: 48 IS MINIMALLY INVASIVE LEFT VENTRICULAR EPICARDIAL LEAD IMPLANTATION THE BEST TREATMENT OPTION FOR BIVENTRICULAR PACING IN PATIENTS WITH HEART FAILURE? J.L. Navia, N. Brozzi, F.A. Atik, E.R. Nowicki, S. Al-Ruzzeh, E. Sepulveda, E.H. Blackstone Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Introduction: Biventricular pacing is an adjuvant treatment for patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay. Early and late failure rates to place adequately are approximately 12% and 15%, respectively. Epicardial lead placement is often a rescue procedure in those patients, we aimed to assess safety and efficacy of LV epicardial lead placement using minimally invasive surgical approaches. Methods: From 10/02 through 10/08, 205 patients underwent minimally invasive LV lead placement .This includes, 65 (32%) video-assisted thoracoscopic, and 140 (68%) mini-thoracotomy surgeries. One hundred forty-five (70%) were males, 90 (43%) had previous cardiac surgery, 83 (40%) preop NYHA III-IV, 97 (47%) had ischemic cardiomyopathy, preop LVEF 16.9+/-7.8%, and 136 (66%) had implantable cardio defibrillators. The mean age was 69+/-10 years. Results: There were no in-hospital deaths, intraoperative complications, or failure to implant the LV lead. Median operative time was longer for the endoscopic approach (175 min) than for mini-thoracotomy (117 min) (P=.006). QRS duration was shorter postoperatively (mean change from preoperative -32+/-14 ms, P<.0001). NYHA IIIIV at 3 month 88 (42%), and at 6 month 65 (32%). LVEF improved (16.9% to 22.9%, p<0.001). Impedance was less postoperatively (mean change -525+/-300 ohms, P<.0001). No changes were evident in LV dimensions. Conclusions: Minimally invasive LV epicardial lead placement is safe and effective. Despite representing a high risk surgical group, epicardial approach offers selection of the best pacing site with minimal morbidity and similar or superior results; and could be considered as a primary option for resynchronization therapy.