Prediction of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy using left ventricular pacing lead position and cardiovascular magnetic resonance derived wall motion patterns: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite marked benefits in many heart failure patients, a considerable proportion of patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) fail to respond appropriately. Recently, a "U-shaped" (type II) wall motion pattern identified by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has been associated with improved CRT response compared to a homogenous (type I) wall motion pattern. There is also evidence that a left ventricular (LV) lead localized to the latest contracting LV site predicts superior response, compared to an LV lead localized remotely from the latest contracting LV site. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated patients undergoing CRT with pre-procedural CMR to determine the presence of type I and type II wall motion patterns and pre-procedural echocardiography to determine end systolic volume (ESV). We assessed the final LV lead position on post-procedural fluoroscopic images to determine whether the lead was positioned concordant to or remote from the latest contracting LV site. CRT response was defined as a ≥ 15% reduction in ESV on a 6 month follow-up echocardiogram. RESULTS: The study included 33 patients meeting conventional indications for CRT with a mean New York Heart Association class of 2.8 ± 0.4 and mean LV ejection fraction of 28 ± 9%. Overall, 55% of patients were echocardiographic responders by ESV criteria. Patients with both a type II pattern and an LV lead concordant to the latest contracting site (T2CL) had a response rate of 92%, compared to a response rate of 33% for those without T2CL (p = 0.003). T2CL was the only independent predictor of response on multivariate analysis (odds ratio 18, 95% confidence interval 1.6-206; p = 0.018). T2CL resulted in significant incremental improvement in prediction of echocardiographic response (increase in the area under the receiver operator curve from 0.69 to 0.84; p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a type II wall motion pattern on CMR and a concordant LV lead predicts superior CRT response. Improving patient selection by evaluating wall motion pattern and targeting LV lead placement may ultimately improve the response rate to CRT.