Repositioning and optimization of left ventricular lead position in non-responders to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy is associated with improved ejection fraction, lower NT-ProBNP values and less heart failure symptoms

Background
Observational data suggests that an anterior or apical left ventricular (LV) position in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) is associated with worse outcome and higher likelihood of “non-response”. It is not known whether the benefits of optimizing LV lead position in a second procedure outweighs the procedural risks.
Objective
To evaluate the clinical effects of LV lead repositioning.
Methods
During the period 2015-2020, we identified all patients where the indication for the procedure was LV lead repositioning due to “non-response” in combination with suboptimal LV lead position. All patients were followed with a structured visit 6-months post LV lead revision. Heart failure hospitalization and mortality data was gathered from the medical records and cross-checked with the population registry.
Results
A total of 25 patients were identified who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All procedures were successful in establishing LV lead pacing in a lateral mid- or basal location. Median follow-up was 2.5 years [1.1-3.7]. There were improvements in NYHA class (mean -0.5±0.5 class, p<0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction (+5 [IQR 2-11] absolute %, p=0.01), QRS duration (-36 [-44 to -8], p<0.001) and NT-ProBNP (-615 [-2837 to +121] ng/L, p=0.03). Clinical outcome was similar to a reference population with CRT (p=ns).
Conclusion
In non-responders to CRT with either an anterior or inferior LV lead position, it was feasible to perform LV lead repositioning in all cases, with a low complication rate. Changing the LV lead position was associated with improved LV ejection fraction, larger QRS-reduction and larger NT-ProBNP reduction.