Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 15824875

[Current guidelines].

Abstract

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) has been adopted fast into clinical practice and current guidelines as a new therapy for some patients with severe systolic heart failure. Current American guidelines have accepted cardiac resynchronisation therapy with the highest level of evidence (A) and have classified the indication in the second highest range (II a). Recommendations in a consensus statement of the German Cardiac Society have been more moderate and have considered contemporarily unsolved questions. After completion of the COMPANION study, which showed a significant benefit for cardiac-resynchronization therapy in the primary end point (mortality and hospitalisation), there were claims for a new evaluation of the cardiac resynchronisation therapy in the German guidelines for cardiac pacing. Contrarily to the American guidelines a risk stratification has been performed into class I (therapy should be performed), class IIa (therapy is reasonable) and class II b (therapy is not unreasonable).

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B Lemke. 2005. [Current guidelines].. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00399-005-0453-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Cardiac resynchronization treatment of heart failure.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is well established as a treatment for patients with moderate to severe heart failure on optimal medical therapy. Early studies demonstrated improved functional capacity and evidence of reverse remodeling; more recently, CRT has been associated with a survival benefit in advanced heart failure both with and without a defibrillator. We review the eight landmark trials in CRT. To date, criteria have focused on electrical delay, but echocardiographic parameters emphasize the importance of mechanical delay or ventricular dyssynchrony. With the exponential rise in implants, new issues have emerged, such as optimal device programming, identifying appropriate candidates, and accounting for cases without clinical benefit from CRT.

Cardiac Pacing, Artificial↗

A novel pacing maneuver to localize focal atrial tachycardia.

BACKGROUND: Although focal atrial tachycardias cannot be entrained, we hypothesized that atrial overdrive pacing (AOP) can be an effective adjunct to localize the focus of these tachycardias at the site where the post-pacing interval (PPI) is closest to the tachycardia cycle length (TCL). METHODS: Overdrive pacing was performed in nine patients during atrial tachycardia, and in a comparison group of 15 patients during sinus rhythm. Pacing at a rate slightly faster than atrial tachycardia in group 1 and sinus rhythm in group 2 was performed from five standardized sites in the right atrium and coronary sinus. The difference between the PPI and tachycardia or sinus cycle length (SCL) was recorded at each site. The tachycardia focus was then located and ablated in group 1, and the atrial site with earliest activation was mapped in group 2. RESULTS: In both groups the PPI-TCL at the five pacing sites reflected the distance from the AT focus or sinus node. In group 1, PPI-TCL at the successful ablation site was 11 +/- 8 msec. In group 2, PPI-SCL at the site of earliest atrial activation was 131 +/- 37 msec (P < 0.001 for comparison). In groups 1 and 2, calculated values at the five pacing sites were proportional to the distance from the AT focus or sinus node, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The PPI-TCL after-AOP of focal atrial tachycardia has a direct relationship to proximity of the pacing site to the focus, and may be clinically useful in finding a successful ablation site.

Cardiac Pacing, Artificial↗