Advertisement

Advancements in ‘Over-the-Wire” Versus Stylet-Guided Left Ventricular Leads

  • S. Boveda
Conference paper

Conclusions

Although the implantation success rate does not differ significantly between over-the-wire and stylet leads, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and perioperative complication decrease when an over-the-wire left ventricular lead is primarily implanted by experienced teams. This novel lead, sometimes combined with coronary vein angioplasty [8, 9], represents a decisive improvement of the technique, especially for pacing of the left ventricle in the optimal spot. Despite all these efforts, a 100% success rate will probably never be reached by the endovascular approach. A surgical approach via a minimally invasive thoracotomy should be considered for those 5% of patients in whom endovascular CRT device implantation has failed.

Keywords

Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy Coronary Sinus Fluoroscopy Time Jude Medical Biventricular Pace 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lau CP, Barold S, Tse HF et al (2003) Advances in devices for cardiac resynchronization in heart failure. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 9:167–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Achtelik M, Bocchiardo M, Trappe HJ et al (2000) Performance of a new steroideluting coronary sinus lead designed for left ventricular pacing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 23:741–743Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Purerfellner H, Nesser HJ, Winter S et al (2000) Transvenous left ventricular lead implantation with the EASYTRAK lead system: the European experience. Am J Cardiol 86:157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boriani G, Padeletti L, Bongiorni G et al (2002) Left ventricular pacing from the coronary sinus: implanters dependance of the success rate on learning curve (abstract). Cardiostim, Nice (abs)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daoud EG, Kalbfleisch SJ, Hummel JD et al (2002) Implantation techniques and chronic lead parameters of biventricular pacing dual-chamber defibrillators. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 13:964–970PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    St John Sutton MG, Plappert T, Abraham WT et al (2003) Effect of cardiac resynchronisation therapy on left ventricular size and function in chronic heart failure. Circulation 107:1985–1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adamson PB, Smith AL, Abraham WT et al (2004) Continuous antonomic assessment in patients with symptomatic heart failure: prognostic value of heart rate variability measured by an implanted cardiac resynchronisation device. Circulation 110:2389–2394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sandler DA, Feigenblum DY, Bernstein NE et al (2002) Cardiac vein angioplasty for biventricular pacing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 25:1788–1789PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hansky B, Lamp B, Minami K et al (2002) Coronary vein balloon angioplasty for left ventricular pacemaker lead implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 40:2144–2149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Boveda
    • 1
  1. 1.Cardiology DepartmentClinique PasteurToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations