Am J Cardiol 2011 Oct 1;108(8):1160-5. Epub 2011 Aug 1.
Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, China.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been mostly achieved by biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), although it can also be provided by left ventricular pacing (LVP). The superiority of BVP over LVP remains uncertain. The present meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to compare the effects of LVP to BVP in patients with CHF. Outcomes analyzed included clinical status (6-minute walk distance, peak oxygen consumption, quality of life, New York Heart Association class), LV function (LV ejection fraction), and LV remodeling (LV end-systolic volume). Five trials fulfilled criteria for inclusion in analysis, which included 574 patients with CHF indicated for CRT. After a midterm follow-up, pooled analysis demonstrated that LVP resulted in similar improvements in 6-minute walk distance (weighted mean difference [WMD] 11.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] -12.39 to 34.90, p = 0.35), quality of life (WMD 0.34, 95% CI -3.72 to 4.39, p = 0.87), peak oxygen consumption (WMD 1.00, 95% CI -0.84 to 2.85, p = 0.29), and New York Heart Association class (WMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.42, p = 0.54). There was a trend toward a superiority of BVP over LVP for LV ejection fraction (WMD 1.28, 95% CI -0.11 to 2.68, p = 0.07) and LV end-systolic volume (WMD -5.73, 95% CI -11.86 to 0.39, p = 0.07). In conclusion, LVP achieves similar improvement in clinical status as BVP in patients with CHF, whereas there was a trend toward superiority of BVP over LVP for LV reverse modeling and systolic function.