Left ventricular scar and the acute hemodynamic effects of multivein and multipolar pacing in cardiac resynchronization

[1]  L. Tavazzi,et al.  Improving cardiac resynchronization therapy response with multipoint left ventricular pacing: Twelve-month follow-up study. , 2015, Heart rhythm.

[2]  P. Lambiase,et al.  Long-Term Results of Triventricular Versus Biventricular Pacing in Heart Failure: A Propensity-Matched Comparison. , 2016, JACC. Clinical electrophysiology.

[3]  Reza Razavi,et al.  Combined identification of septal flash and absence of myocardial scar by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging improves prediction of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy , 2014, Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology.

[4]  A. Auricchio,et al.  20 years of cardiac resynchronization therapy. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  Angelo Auricchio,et al.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy guided by late gadolinium-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance , 2011, Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

[6]  P. Khairy,et al.  Acute haemodynamic comparison of multisite and biventricular pacing with a quadripolar left ventricular lead. , 2013, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[7]  M. Ginks,et al.  Limitations of chronic delivery of multi-vein left ventricular stimulation for cardiac resynchronization therapy , 2015, Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology.

[8]  C. Leclercq.  A randomized comparison of triple site versus dual site ventricular stimulation in patients with congestive heart failure, in: J Am Coll Cardiol, 51 (2008), 1455, et al , 2008 .

[9]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Effect of total scar burden on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging on response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. , 2007, The American journal of cardiology.

[10]  Sylvain Ploux,et al.  Acute electrical and hemodynamic effects of multisite left ventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in the dyssynchronous canine heart. , 2014, Heart rhythm.

[11]  Frits W. Prinzen,et al.  Non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy: the magnitude of the problem and the issues. , 2011, Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society.

[12]  K. Rhode,et al.  Multi-site left ventricular pacing as a potential treatment for patients with postero-lateral scar: insights from cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and invasive haemodynamic assessment. , 2012, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[13]  Reza Razavi,et al.  Cardiac magnetic resonance-derived anatomy, scar, and dyssynchrony fused with fluoroscopy to guide LV lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy: a comparison with acute haemodynamic measures and echocardiographic reverse remodelling. , 2013, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[14]  Reza Razavi,et al.  Mechanistic insights into the benefits of multisite pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy: The importance of electrical substrate and rate of left ventricular activation. , 2015, Heart rhythm.

[15]  Christophe Leclercq,et al.  A randomized comparison of triple-site versus dual-site ventricular stimulation in patients with congestive heart failure. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  G Plank,et al.  Biophysical Modeling to Simulate the Response to Multisite Left Ventricular Stimulation Using a Quadripolar Pacing Lead , 2012, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[17]  Stuart P. Rosenberg,et al.  A comparison of left ventricular endocardial, multisite, and multipolar epicardial cardiac resynchronization: an acute haemodynamic and electroanatomical study. , 2014, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[18]  C. Rinaldi,et al.  In Heart Failure Patients with Left Bundle Branch Block Single Lead MultiSpot Left Ventricular Pacing Does Not Improve Acute Hemodynamic Response To Conventional Biventricular Pacing. A Multicenter Prospective, Interventional, Non-Randomized Study , 2016, PloS one.

[19]  Kevin Vernooy,et al.  Strategies to improve cardiac resynchronization therapy , 2014, Nature Reviews Cardiology.

[20]  A. Michelucci,et al.  Dual-site left ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy. , 2008, The American journal of cardiology.

[21]  Nikolaos S. Papageorgiou,et al.  Long-Term Results of Triventricular Versus Biventricular Pacing in Heart Failure , 2016 .

[22]  F. Leyva,et al.  Haemodynamic effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy using single-vein, three-pole, multipoint left ventricular pacing in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and a left ventricular free wall scar: the MAESTRO study. , 2016, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[23]  L. Tavazzi,et al.  Multipoint left ventricular pacing improves acute hemodynamic response assessed with pressure-volume loops in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients. , 2014, Heart rhythm.

[24]  Frits W Prinzen,et al.  Non-Responders to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy – The Magnitude of the Problem and the Issues – , 2011 .