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
Remote ischemic conditioning wikipedia , lookup
Management of acute coronary syndrome wikipedia , lookup
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy wikipedia , lookup
Cardiac contractility modulation wikipedia , lookup
Ventricular fibrillation wikipedia , lookup
Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia wikipedia , lookup
3027 Cat: Internal defibrillation/implantable antiarrhythmic devices/pacing LEFT VENTRICULAR REVERSE REMODELING WITH BIVENTRICULAR VERSUS RIGHT VENTRICULAR PACING IN PATIENTS WITH ATRIOVENTRICULAR BLOCK AND LEFT HEART FAILURE IN THE BLOCK HF TRIAL M. St. John Sutton1, A.B. Curtis2, S.J. Worley3, T. Plappert1, P.B. Adamson4, E.S. Chung5 1. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA 2. University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA 3. Lancaster General Hospital, Lancaster, PA, USA 4. Oklahoma Foundation for Cardiovascular Research, Oklahoma City, OK, USA 5. The Heart and Vascular Center at The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA Background: In patients with heart failure (HF), biventricular pacing (BIV) attenuates adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling in addition to improving survival and relieving symptoms. However, little is known about the effects of BIV pacing in HF patients with atrioventricular (AV) block. Methods: The BLOCK HF trial randomized patients with AV block, NYHA class I-III heart failure, and LV ejection fraction (EF) less than or equal to 50% to BIV or right ventricular (RV) pacing. Doppler echocardiograms (DE) were obtained at randomization (30-60 days post-implant) and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Data analysis comparing changes in 10 pre-specified echo parameters over time was conducted using a Bayesian adaptive design and all objectives were evaluated with intention-to-treat analyses. Results: There were 624 subjects among the 691 randomized subjects who had paired DE data for one or more analyses. LV volumes, EF, diastolic function and intraventricular mechanical delay (IVMD) were estimated at all time points. BIV pacing resulted in LV reverse remodeling, with significant reduction in LV end systolic and end diastolic volume indices and in IVMD and improvement in EF. By contrast, none of these parameters changed with RV pacing, indicating that no reverse remodeling occurred postrandomization. Conclusions: Patients with AV block, depressed LV function, and HF symptoms benefit from BIV pacing with regard to cardiac structure and function. This DE analysis has important clinical implications in supporting the use of BIV pacing rather than RV pacing for patients with HF and AV block.