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.
Similar content being viewed by others
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
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.
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.
Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL, et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1845–53.
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.
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.
Rinaldi CA, Burri H, Thibault B, et al. A review of multisite pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy. Europace. 2015;17:7–17.
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.
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.
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.
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.
• 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.
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.
• 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 .
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.
• 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.
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.
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.
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.
Ramanathan C, Ghanem RN, Jia P, Ryu K, Rudy Y. Noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging for cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmia. Nat Med. 2004;10:422–8.
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.
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.
• 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 .
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.
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.
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.
• 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 .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
•• 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 .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
• 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
Padeletti L, Colella A, Michelucci A, et al. Dual-site left ventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:1687–92.
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.
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
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.
MOre REsponse on Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy with MultiPoint Pacing (MORE-CRT MPP), ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02006069.
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.
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.
Standard Care Versus Triventricular Pacing in Heart Failure (STRIVE HF) ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02529410.
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.
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.
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.
Burri H, Sunthorn H, Somsen A, et al. Optimizing sequential biventricular pacing using radionuclide ventriculography. Heart Rhythm. 2005;2:960–5.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
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
About this article
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
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11897-017-0350-z