Search

Byline: Harald H. Woltjera, Harm J. Bogaarda, Jean G.F. Bronzwaer, Carel C. de Cock, Peter M.J.M. de Vries Abstract: Early recognition of heart failure is important because early treatment reduces mortality and hospitalization rates. In screening for this disease, there is a need for a simple, safe, and cost-effective method to obtain cardiovascular variables. Therefore we developed a noninvasive impedance cardiographic method to predict the pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) from the impedance cardiogram. The impedance cardiographic technique, though, was originally designed for stroke volume (SV) determination. The objectives of this study were to validate both variables by comparison with the paired, invasively obtained equivalents. PCWP, measured with a pulmonary artery catheter, was related to the O/C ratio from the impedance cardiogram. The O/C ratio was calculated as the amplitude of the impedance cardiogram during diastole (O) divided by the maximum height during systole (C). Stroke volume was also calculated from the impedance cardiogram according to the equation of Kubicek (SV.sub.IC) and compared with thermodilution (SV.sub.TD). Data analysis was performed in 24 stable patients who underwent diagnostic heart catheterization. Linear regression analysis showed that the O/C ratio was strongly related to the invasively measured PCWP over a range of 3 to 30 mm Hg (r = 0.92, standard error of the estimate, 3.2 mm Hg). Between SV.sub.IC and SV.sub.TD a moderate correlation was established (r = 0.69), but after exclusion of the data from patients with an aortic valve disorder (n = 5), the correlation increased considerably (r = 0.87). No significant differences between SV.sub.IC and SV.sub.TD were found (mean difference [+ or -] 2 SD = 1.8 [+ or -] 28.8 ml). These preliminary observations suggest that impedance cardiography can predict PCWP and measure SV over a wide range of clinically relevant values. The combined measurement of SV and PCWP by impedance cardiography might be a clinical useful tool in screening for heart failure. (Am Heart J 1997;134:450-5.) Author Affiliation: Amsterdam, The Netherlands From the Departments of Pulmonary Medicine and Cardiology, Free University Hospital Article History: Received 21 August 1996; Accepted 24 April 1997 Article Note: (footnote) [star] Reprint requests: P.M.J.M. de Vries, MD, Academic Hospital VU, Department of Pulmonary Medicine, PO Box 7075, 1007 MD Amsterdam, The Netherlands., [star][star] 0002-8703/97/$5.00 + 0 4/1/83043

Aims: Several implantation strategies have been proposed to improve response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), including bifocal left ventricular (LV) stimulation and optimal single-LV lead placement. This study aimed to compare these two strategies during invasive pressure-volume (PV) loop measurements.Methods and Results: Thirty-three patients eligible for CRT were included [21 (64%) men, 20 (61%) ischaemic aetiology, QRS 155 ± 23 ms], and underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging and invasive PV loop measurements. Left ventricular pump function was characterized by stroke work (SW) and dP/dtmax (5.1 ± 3.4 L mmHg and 856 ± 190 mmHg/s, respectively). Haemodynamic response was assessed during stimulation at single-LV sites and during bifocal LV [anterolateral and posterolateral (PL)] stimulation. Response during bifocal LV stimulation was not significantly higher compared with standard PL pacing (SW; β = 9.4 ± 5.4, P = 0.080; dP/dtmax, β = 0.2 ± 1.9, P = 0.922). However, mean pump function improvement was significantly higher during stimulation at the optimal LV site compared with bifocal LV stimulation (SW; β = 12.7 ± 5.1, P = 0.012; dP/dtmax, β = 3.3 ± 1.2, P = 0.020). Myocardial tissue properties were assessed by CMR tissue tagging. Mechanical activation at the optimal LV site was significantly more delayed compared with the worst LV site (431 ± 93 ms vs. 326 ± 127 ms; P = 0.004).Conclusion: Stimulation at the optimal LV site showed a significantly higher pump function improvement compared with bifocal LV stimulation. Mechanical activation at the optimal LV site was significantly more delayed compared with the non-optimal LV site. In general, these results suggest that implantation of a second LV lead yields no additional benefit over implantation of one optimally placed LV lead. However, a bifocal approach might be beneficial in the individual patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]