Skip to main content
  • Nonpharmacologic Therapy: Surgery, Ventricular Assist Devices, Biventricular Pacing, and Exercise (A Hasan, Section Editor)
  • Published:

Updates in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Chronic Heart Failure: Review of Multisite Pacing

Current Heart Failure Reports volume 14, pages 376–383 (2017)Cite this article

An Erratum to this article was published on 30 August 2017

This article has been updated

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces the morbidity and mortality of patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction and intra-ventricular conduction delay. However, its clinical outcomes are heterogeneous and not all patients show a beneficial response. Multisite pacing (MSP), by stimulating the myocardium from more than one locations, is a potential therapeutic option in patients requiring CRT. This article provides a current update in the methods and outcomes of MSP, as well as in challenges in this field and opportunities for further research and development.

Recent Findings

MSP can be delivered either with multiple leads or with quadripolar LV leads which can stimulate the LV from two separate sites. Initial results are promising but not always consistent across studies. Larger patient subgroups and longer follow-up duration are required for more conclusive evaluation of MSP.

Summary

Routine use of MSP in clinical practice cannot be advocated at present. In selected patient subgroups, however, MSP could be considered. Newer devices and expanding knowledge are expected to facilitate the more widespread implementation of MSP and the assessment of its effects in the clinical outcomes of CRT.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Change history

  • 30 August 2017

    An erratum to this article has been published.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Moss AJ, Hall WJ, Cannom DS, et al. Cardiac-resynchronization therapy for the prevention of heart-failure events. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1329–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tang AS, Wells GA, Talajic M, et al. Cardiac-resynchronization therapy for mild-to-moderate heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:2385–95.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL, et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1845–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Young JB, Abraham WT, Smith AL, et al. Combined cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioversion defibrillation in advanced chronic heart failure: the MIRACLE ICD Trial. JAMA. 2003;289:2685–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Daubert JC, Saxon L, Adamson PB, et al. 2012 EHRA/HRS expert consensus statement on cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: implant and follow-up recommendations and management. Europace. 2012;14:1236–86.

  6. Rinaldi CA, Burri H, Thibault B, et al. A review of multisite pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy. Europace. 2015;17:7–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zareba W, Klein H, Cygankiewicz I, et al. Effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy by QRS morphology in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT). Circulation. 2011;123:1061–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Auricchio A, Fantoni C, Regoli F, et al. Characterization of left ventricular activation in patients with heart failure and left bundle-branch block. Circulation. 2004;109:1133–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ginks MR, Lambiase PD, Duckett SG, et al. A simultaneous X-ray/MRI and noncontact mapping study of the acute hemodynamic effect of left ventricular endocardial and epicardial cardiac resynchronization therapy in humans. Circ Heart Fail. 2011;4:170–9.

  10. Fung JW, Yu CM, Yip G, et al. Variable left ventricular activation pattern in patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block. Heart. 2004;90:17–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. • Jackson T, Sohal M, Chen Z, et al. A U-shaped type II contraction pattern in patients with strict left bundle branch block predicts super-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11:1790–7. This study investigated contraction patterns via cine CMR among patients with strict LBBB undergoing CRT, and demonstrated that a type II contraction pattern is strongly predictive for reverse remodeling and super-response.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ginks MR, Shetty AK, Lambiase PD, et al. Benefits of endocardial and multisite pacing are dependent on the type of left ventricular electric activation pattern and presence of ischemic heart disease: insights from electroanatomic mapping. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012;5:889–97.

  13. • Sohal M, Shetty A, Niederer S, 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. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:2449–57. This study compares the hemodynamic and electrical effects of MSP in different subgroups of patients and found that patients not meeting strict criteria for LBBB appear most likely to derive benefit from MSP .

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Khan FZ, Virdee MS, Palmer CR, et al. Targeted left ventricular lead placement to guide cardiac resynchronization therapy: the TARGET study: a randomized, controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1509–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. • Saba S, Marek J, Schwartzman D, et al. Echocardiography-guided left ventricular lead placement for cardiac resynchronization therapy: results of the speckle tracking assisted resynchronization therapy for electrode region trial. Circ Heart Fail 2013;6:427–34. This study showed that cardiac resynchronization therapy with LV lead placement at the site of latest time to peak radial strain by speckle tracking echocardiography was associated with an improvement in event-free survival over 1.8 years.

  16. Singh JP, Klein HU, Huang DT, et al. Left ventricular lead position and clinical outcome in the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial-cardiac resynchronization therapy (MADIT-CRT) trial. Circulation. 2011;123:1159–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Derval N, Steendijk P, Gula LJ, et al. Optimizing hemodynamics in heart failure patients by systematic screening of left ventricular pacing sites: the lateral left ventricular wall and the coronary sinus are rarely the best sites. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:566–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ghanem RN, Jia P, Ramanathan C, Ryu K, Markowitz A, Rudy Y. Noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging (ECGI): comparison to intraoperative mapping in patients. Heart Rhythm. 2005;2:339–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Ramanathan C, Ghanem RN, Jia P, Ryu K, Rudy Y. Noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging for cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmia. Nat Med. 2004;10:422–8.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Ploux S, Strik M, van Hunnik A, van Middendorp L, Kuiper M, Prinzen FW. Acute electrical and hemodynamic effects of multisite left ventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in the dyssynchronous canine heart. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11:119–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ginks MR, Duckett SG, Kapetanakis S, 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. Europace. 2012;14:373–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. • Sperzel J, Danschel W, Gutleben KJ, et al. First prospective, multi-centre clinical experience with a novel left ventricular quadripolar lead. Europace. 2012;14:365–72. This prospective multi-centre investigation showed that the use of a quadripolar LV lead for CRT was associated with low LV threshold and no PNS .

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shetty AK, Duckett SG, Bostock J, et al. Initial single-center experience of a quadripolar pacing lead for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34:484–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Forleo GB, Mantica M, Di Biase L, et al. Clinical and procedural outcome of patients implanted with a quadripolar left ventricular lead: early results of a prospective multicenter study. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9:1822–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tomassoni G, Baker J, Corbisiero R, et al. Postoperative performance of the quartet(R) left ventricular heart lead. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013;24:449–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. • Behar JM, Bostock J, Zhu Li AP, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy delivered via a multipolar left ventricular lead is associated with reduced mortality and elimination of phrenic nerve stimulation: long-term follow-up from a multicenter registry. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015;26:540–6. This study of a multicenter registry, demonstrated that the use of quadripolar LV leads for CRT was associated with elimination of PNS and lower overall mortality .

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Behar JM, Chin HM, Fearn S, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of quadripolar versus bipolar left ventricular leads for cardiac resynchronization defibrillator therapy in a large, multicenter UK registry. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017;3:107–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. O'Donnell D, Sperzel J, Thibault B, et al. Additional electrodes on the quartet™ LV lead provide more programmable pacing options than bipolar and tripolar equivalents. Europace. 2016;19:euw039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Thibault B, Dubuc M, Khairy P, et al. Acute haemodynamic comparison of multisite and biventricular pacing with a quadripolar left ventricular lead. Europace. 2013;15:984–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pappone C, Calovic Z, Vicedomini G, et al. Multipoint left ventricular pacing improves acute hemodynamic response assessed with pressure-volume loops in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11:394–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rinaldi CA, Kranig W, Leclercq C, et al. Acute effects of multisite left ventricular pacing on mechanical dyssynchrony in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Card Fail. 2013;19:731–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. •• Rinaldi CA, Leclercq C, Kranig W, et al. Improvement in acute contractility and hemodynamics with multipoint pacing via a left ventricular quadripolar pacing lead. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2014;40:75–80. This study demonstrated that MSP delivered via a quadripolar LV lead resulted in a significant acute improvement in mean peak radial strain and mean VTI compared to conventional CRT .

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Pappone C, Calovic Z, Vicedomini G, et al. Improving cardiac resynchronization therapy response with multipoint left ventricular pacing: twelve-month follow-up study. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1250–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zanon F, Baracca E, Pastore G, et al. Multipoint pacing by a left ventricular quadripolar lead improves the acute hemodynamic response to CRT compared with conventional biventricular pacing at any site. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:975–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zanon F, Marcantoni L, Baracca E, et al. Optimization of left ventricular pacing site plus multipoint pacing improves remodeling and clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy at 1 year. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:1644–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Umar F, Taylor RJ, Stegemann B, 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. Europace. 2016;18:1227–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Siciliano M, Migliore F, Badano L, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy by multipoint pacing improves response of left ventricular mechanics and fluid dynamics: a three-dimensional and particle image velocimetry echo study. Europace. 2016;euw331

  38. Forleo GB, Santini L, Giammaria M, et al. Multipoint pacing via a quadripolar left-ventricular lead: preliminary results from the Italian registry on multipoint left-ventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy (IRON-MPP). Europace. 2017;19:1170-7.

  39. Sterlinski M, Sokal A, Lenarczyk R, 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. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0154024.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Yoshida K, Seo Y, Yamasaki H, et al. Effect of triangle ventricular pacing on haemodynamics and dyssynchrony in patients with advanced heart failure: a comparison study with conventional bi-ventricular pacing therapy. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:2610–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Yamasaki H, Seo Y, Tada H, et al. Clinical and procedural characteristics of acute hemodynamic responders undergoing triple-site ventricular pacing for advanced heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 2011;108:1297–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pappone C, Rosanio S, Oreto G, et al. Cardiac pacing in heart failure patients with left bundle branch block: impact of pacing site for optimizing left ventricular resynchronization. Ital Heart J. 2000;1:464–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lenarczyk R, Kowalski O, Kukulski T, et al. Triple-site biventricular pacing in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy: a feasibility study. Europace. 2007;9:762–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Leclercq C, Gadler F, Kranig W, et al. A randomized comparison of triple-site versus dual-site ventricular stimulation in patients with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:1455–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lenarczyk R, Kowalski O, Kukulski T, et al. Mid-term outcomes of triple-site vs. conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy: a preliminary study. Int J Cardiol. 2009;133:87–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Rogers DP, Lambiase PD, Lowe MD, Chow AW. A randomized double-blind crossover trial of triventricular versus biventricular pacing in heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2012;14:495–505.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. • Ogano M, Iwasaki YK, Tanabe J, et al. Antiarrhythmic effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy with triple-site biventricular stimulation. Europace. 2013;15:1491–8. This paper reported that triple-site biventricular stimulation using a single right ventricular (RV) and double left ventricular (LV) lead reduced ventricular arrhythmias compared to biventricular pacing during a mean follow-up of 481 days after implantation

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Padeletti L, Colella A, Michelucci A, et al. Dual-site left ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:1687–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Niederer SA, Shetty AK, Plank G, et al. Biophysical modeling to simulate the response to multisite left ventricular stimulation using a quadripolar pacing lead. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012;35:204–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Tomassoni G, Baker J 2nd, Corbisiero R, et al. Rationale and design of a randomized trial to assess the safety and efficacy of MultiPoint Pacing (MPP) in cardiac resynchronization therapy: The MPP Trial. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2017;00:e12448

  51. Tomassoni G, Baker J, Corbisiero R et al. Safety and efficacy of multipoint pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy: the MultiPoint Pacing (MPP) IDE Study. 2016 Heart Rhythm Society, 2016:LBCT 01–03.

  52. MOre REsponse on Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy with MultiPoint Pacing (MORE-CRT MPP), ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02006069.

  53. Barbieri F, Pfeifer B, Berger T, Dichtl W. Comparison of conventional resynchronization therapy to multipoint pacing using two separate left ventricular leads by non-invasive imaging of cardiac electrophysiology. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:3237.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Behar JM, Bostock J, Ginks M, et al. Limitations of chronic delivery of multi-vein left ventricular stimulation for cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2015;42:135–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Standard Care Versus Triventricular Pacing in Heart Failure (STRIVE HF) ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02529410.

  56. Antoniadis AP, Behar JM, Claridge S, Jackson T, Sohal M, Rinaldi CA. Multisite pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: promise and pitfalls. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2016;18:64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Duckett SG, Ginks M, Shetty AK, et al. Invasive acute hemodynamic response to guide left ventricular lead implantation predicts chronic remodeling in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1128–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Shetty AK, Duckett SG, Ginks MR, 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. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;14:692–9.

  59. Burri H, Sunthorn H, Somsen A, et al. Optimizing sequential biventricular pacing using radionuclide ventriculography. Heart Rhythm. 2005;2:960–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Rao RK, Kumar UN, Schafer J, Viloria E, De Lurgio D, Foster E. Reduced ventricular volumes and improved systolic function with cardiac resynchronization therapy: a randomized trial comparing simultaneous biventricular pacing, sequential biventricular pacing, and left ventricular pacing. Circulation. 2007;115:2136–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Cardiovascular Department, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, Lower Ground Floor, South Wing, St Thomas’ Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7EH, UK

    Antonios P. Antoniadis, Ben Sieniewicz, Justin Gould, Bradley Porter, Jessica Webb, Simon Claridge, Jonathan M. Behar & Christopher Aldo Rinaldi

Authors
  1. Antonios P. Antoniadis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ben Sieniewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Justin Gould
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bradley Porter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jessica Webb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Simon Claridge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jonathan M. Behar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Christopher Aldo Rinaldi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonios P. Antoniadis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Antonios P. Antoniadis, Ben Sieniewicz, Bradley Porter, Jessica Webb, Simon Claridge, and Jonathan Behar declare no conflicts of interest.

Christopher Aldo Rinaldi reports grants and personal fees from Abbott, grants and personal fees from Medtronic, grants and personal fees from Livanova, and grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific.

Justin Gould reports grants from St Jude Medical Fellowship Grant.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

The original version of this article was revised: The middle initial “M” of Jonathan Behar was missing. It should have been Jonathan M. Behar.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Nonpharmacologic Therapy: Surgery, Ventricular Assist Devices, Biventricular Pacing, and Exercise

An erratum to this article is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11897-017-0359-3.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Antoniadis, A.P., Sieniewicz, B., Gould, J. et al. Updates in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Chronic Heart Failure: Review of Multisite Pacing. Curr Heart Fail Rep 14, 376–383 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11897-017-0350-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11897-017-0350-z

Keywords

  • Cardiac resynchronization therapy
  • Biventricular pacing
  • Multisite pacing
  • Multipolar left ventricular leads
  • Heart failure
  • Dyssynchrony