ALternate Site Cardiac ResYNChronization (ALSYNC): a prospective and multicentre study of left ventricular endocardial pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy

被引:94
|
作者
Morgan, John M. [1 ]
Biffi, Mauro [2 ]
Geller, Laszlo [3 ]
Leclercq, Christophe [4 ]
Ruffa, Franco [5 ]
Tung, Stanley [6 ]
Defaye, Pascal [7 ]
Yang, Zhongping [8 ]
Gerritse, Bart [9 ]
van Ginneken, Mireille [9 ]
Yee, Raymond [10 ]
Jais, Pierre [11 ]
机构
[1] Southampton Univ Hosp, Fac Med, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Tremona Rd, Southampton SO16 6YD, Hants, England
[2] S Orsola Malpighi Univ Hosp, Bologna, Italy
[3] Semmelweis Univ, Ctr Heart, Budapest, Hungary
[4] Univ Hosp, Rennes, France
[5] Alessandro Manzoni Hosp, Lecce, Italy
[6] Univ British Columbia, St Pauls Hosp, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[7] Univ Hosp, Grenoble, France
[8] Medtronic Plc, Minneapolis, MN USA
[9] Medtronic Bakken Res Ctr, Maastricht, Netherlands
[10] London Hlth Sci Ctr, London, ON, Canada
[11] Bordeaux Univ, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
关键词
Prospective clinical trial; Left ventricular endocardial pacing; Heart failure; Safety; HEART-FAILURE; STIMULATION; EFFICACY; STROKE; TRIAL; SINUS; RISK; LEAD;
D O I
10.1093/eurheartj/ehv723
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims The ALternate Site Cardiac ResYNChronization (ALSYNC) study evaluated the feasibility and safety of left ventricular endocardial pacing (LVEP) using a market-released pacing lead implanted via a single pectoral access by a novel atrial transseptal lead delivery system. Methods and results ALSYNC was a prospective clinical investigation with a minimum of 12-month follow-up in 18 centres of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-indicated patients, who had failed or were unsuitable for conventional CRT. The ALSYNC system comprises the investigational lead delivery system and LVEP lead. Patients required warfarin therapy post-implant. The primary study objective was safety at 6-month follow-up, whichwas defined as freedom from complications related to the lead delivery system, implant procedure, or the lead >= 70%. The ALSYNC study enrolled 138 patients. The LVEP lead implant success rate was 89.4%. Freedom from complications meeting the definition of primary endpoint was 82.2% at 6 months (95% CI 75.6-88.8%). In the study, 14 transient ischaemic attacks (9 patients, 6.8%), 5 non-disabling strokes (5 patients, 3.8%), and 23 deaths (17.4%) were observed. No death was from a primary endpoint complication. At 6 months, the New York Heart Association class improved in 59% of patients, and 55% had LV end-systolic volume reduction of 15% or greater. Those patients enrolled after CRT non-response showed similar improvement with LVEP. Conclusions The ALSYNC study demonstrates clinical feasibility, and provides an early indication of possible benefit and risk of LVEP.
引用
收藏
页码:2118 / 2127
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Prospective evaluation of electrocardiographic parameters in cardiac resynchronization therapy: Detecting nonresponders by left ventricular pacing
    Koebe, Julia
    Dechering, Dirk G.
    Rath, Benjamin
    Reinke, Florian
    Moennig, Gerold
    Wasmer, Kristina
    Eckardt, Lars
    [J]. HEART RHYTHM, 2012, 9 (04) : 499 - 504
  • [32] Successful cardiac resynchronization with single-site left ventricular pacing in children
    Tomaske, Maren
    Breithardt, Ole A.
    Balmer, Christian
    Bauersfeld, Urs
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2009, 136 (02) : 136 - 143
  • [33] Right ventricular outflow tract pacing as an alternative to left ventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy
    Alhous, H.
    Hannah, A.
    Small, G.
    Hillis, G.
    Broadhurst, P.
    [J]. SCOTTISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2011, 56 (01) : 52 - 52
  • [34] New method for cardiac resynchronization therapy: transapical endocardial lead implantation for left ventricular free wall pacing
    Kassai, Imre
    Foldesi, Csaba
    Szekely, Andrea
    Szili-Torok, Tamas
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2008, 10 (07): : 882 - 883
  • [35] Transseptal endocardial left ventricular pacing: An alternative technique for coronary sinus lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy
    van Gelder, Berry M.
    Scheffer, Mike G.
    Meijer, Albert
    Bracke, Frank A.
    [J]. HEART RHYTHM, 2007, 4 (04) : 454 - 460
  • [36] Endocardial Left Ventricular Pacing Improves Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Chronic Asynchronous Infarction and Heart Failure Models
    Strik, Marc
    Rademakers, Leonard M.
    van Deursen, Caroline J. M.
    van Hunnik, Arne
    Kuiper, Marion
    Klersy, Catherine
    Auricchio, Angelo
    Prinzen, Frits W.
    [J]. CIRCULATION-ARRHYTHMIA AND ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2012, 5 (01): : 191 - 200
  • [37] Left bundle branch pacing vs ventricular septal pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy
    Chen, Jingjing
    Ezzeddine, Fatima M.
    Liu, Xiaoke
    Vaidya, Vaibhav
    McLeod, Christopher J.
    Valverde, Arturo M.
    Munoz, Freddy Del-Carpio
    Deshmukh, Abhishek J.
    Madhavan, Malini
    Killu, Ammar M.
    Mulpuru, Siva K.
    Friedman, Paul A.
    Cha, Yong-Mei
    [J]. HEART RHYTHM O2, 2024, 5 (03): : 150 - 157
  • [38] Cardiac resynchronization pacing therapy
    Casey, C
    Knight, BP
    [J]. CARDIOLOGY, 2004, 101 (1-3) : 72 - 78
  • [39] Right ventricular only pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy
    Hermes-Laufer, Julia
    Hofer, Daniel
    Flammer, Andreas
    Ruschitzka, Frank
    Steffel, Jan
    Winnik, Stephan
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2022, 24 (01): : 70 - 70
  • [40] Impact of left ventricular pacing threshold on ventricular arrhythmia occurrence in cardiac resynchronization therapy
    Ferri-Certic, Jerko
    Zavrl-Dzananovic, Dinko
    Lezaic, Luka
    Zizek, David
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2019, 74 (3-4) : 353 - 359