KOR

e-Article

Comparison of right ventricular septal pacing and right ventricular apical pacing in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators: the SEPTAL CRT Study
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Leclercq, ChristopheSadoul, NicolasMont, LluisDefaye, PascalOsca, JoaquimMouton, ElisabethIsnard, RichardHabib, GilbertZamorano, JoseDerumeaux, GenevieveFernandez-Lozano, IgnacioDupuis, Jean-MarcRouleau, FrédéricTassin, AudeBordachar, PierreClémenty, JacquesLafitte, StephanePloux, SylvanReant, PatriciaRitter, PhilippeDefaye, PascalJacon, PeggyMondesert, BlandineSaunier, CaroleVautrin, EstelleKacet, SalemGuedon-Moreau, LaurenceKlug, DidierKouakam, ClaudeMarechaux, SylvestreMarquie, ChristellePolge, Anne SophieRichardson, MarjorieChevallier, PhilippeDe Breyne, BrigitteLotek, Marcin M.Nonin, EmiliePineau, JulienDeharo, Jean-ClaudeBastard, EmilieFranceschi, FrédéricHabib, GilbertJego, ChristophePeyrouse, EricPrevot, SebastienSaint-Joseph, HôpitalBremondy, MichelFaure, JacquesFerracci, AngeLefevre, JeanPisapia, AndreDavy, Jean-MarcCransac, FredericCung, Tien TriGeorger, FredericPasquie, Jean-LucRaczka, FranckSportouch-Dukhan, CatherineSadoul, NicolasBlangy, HuguesBruntz, Jean-FrançoisFreysz, LucGroben, LaurentHuttin, OlivierBammert, AntoineBurban, MarcCebron, Jean-PierreGras, DanielFrank, RobertDuthoit, GuillaumeHidden-Lucet, FrançoiseHimbert, CarolineIsnard, RichardLacotte, JérômePousset, FrançoiseZerah, ThierryLeclercq, ChristopheBellouin, AnnaïkCrocq, ChristopheDeplace, ChristianDonal, ErwanHamon, CécileMabo, PhilippeRomain, OlivierSolnon, AudeFrederic, AnselmeBauer, FabriceBernard, MathieuGodin, BenedicteKurtz, BaptisteSavoure, ArnaudCopie, XavierLascault, GillesPaziaud, OlivierPiot, OlivierTouche, ThierryDelay, Toulouse MarcChilon, TaliaDetis, NicolasDuparc, AlexandreHebrard, AurélienMassabuau, PierreMaury, PhilippeMondoly, PierreRumeau, PhilippePasteur, CliniqueBoveda, SergeAdrover, LaurenceCombes, NicolasDeplagne, AntoineMarco-Baertich, IsabelleFondard, OlivierMartínez, Juan GabrielIbañez Criado, José LuisOrtuño, DiegoMont, LluisBerruezo, AntonioEduard, BeluMartín, AnaMerschon, Franco M.Sitges, MartaTolosana, José MaríaVidal, BárbaraHebron, H. Vallei Mitjans, Angel MoyaRodriguez, Oscar AlcaldeRodriguez Palomares, José FernandoRivas, NuriaTeixidó, Giselade Hierro, H. PuertaLozano, Ignacio FernándezRuiz Bautista, Maria LorenaCastro, VictorCavero, Miguel AngelGutierrez, CarlosRos, Nataliade la Victoria, H. VirgenAlzueta Rodriguez, Francisco JavierCabrera, FernandoCordero, Alberto BarreraPeña, José Luisde Valme Sevilla, H.Gonzáles, Juan Lealdel OjoGarcia Medina, M DoloresJiménez, Ricardo PavónVillagomez, Davidde la Salud Toledo, H. VirgenCastellanos Martinez, EduardoAlcalá, JuanMaicas, CarolinaArias Palomares, Miguel AngelPuchol, AlbertoValencia, H. La FéOscaAsensi, JoaquimCarmona, Anastasio QuesadaDe Carranza, M José Sancho-TelloDe Ros, José OlagüePareja, Enrique CastroPérez, Oscar CanoSaez, Ana OsaHortega, H. RioGuilarte, Benito HerrerosMuñoz San Jose, Juan FranciscoPérez Sanz, Teresa MyriamLogeart, DamienGil, Maria LopezLeclercq, ChristopheLozano, Ignacio Fernandezde Hierro, H. PuertaDerumeaux, Genevieve
Source
European Heart Journal. Feb 01, 2016 37(5):473-483
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
0195-668X
Abstract
AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a recommended treatment of heart failure (HF) patients with depressed left ventricular ejection fraction and wide QRS. The optimal right ventricular (RV) lead position being a matter of debate, we sought to examine whether RV septal (RVS) pacing was not inferior to RV apical (RVA) pacing on left ventricular reverse remodelling in patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 263, age = 63.4 ± 9.5 years) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to RVS (n = 131) vs. RVA (n = 132) pacing. Left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) reduction between baseline and 6 months was not different between the two groups (−25.3 ± 39.4 mL in RVS group vs. −29.3 ± 44.5 mL in RVA group, P = 0.79). Right ventricular septal pacing was not non-inferior (primary endpoint) to RVA pacing with regard to LVESV reduction (average difference = −4.06 mL; P = 0.006 with a −20 mL non-inferiority margin). The percentage of ‘echo-responders’ defined by LVESV reduction >15% between baseline and 6 months was similar in both groups (50%) with no difference in the time to first HF hospitalization or death (P = 0.532). Procedural or device-related serious adverse events occurred in 68 patients (RVS = 37) with no difference between the two groups (P = 0.401). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that septal RV pacing in CRT is non-inferior to apical RV pacing for LV reverse remodelling at 6 months with no difference in the clinical outcome. No recommendation for optimal RV lead position can hence be drawn from this study. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV NUMBER: NCT 00833352.