You just clicked a link to go to another website. If you continue, you may go to a site run by someone else.
It is possible that some of the products on the other site are not approved in your region or country.
Your browser is out of date
With an updated browser, you will have a better Medtronic website experience. Update my browser now.
The content of this website is exclusively reserved for Healthcare Professionals in countries with applicable health authority product registrations, except those practicing in France as some of the content is not in compliance with the French Advertising law N°2011-2012 dated 29th December 2011, article 34.
Click “OK” to confirm you are a Healthcare Professional.
A high percentage of BiV pacing is associated with improved CRT response.1 However, the presence of a pacing stimulus does not imply full capture.2,3 Traditional pacing counters only report the presence of a pacing stimulus, potentially leading to over-reporting of effective pacing.2,3
The EffectivCRT™ Diagnostic uses a unipolar electrogram to evaluate morphology, looking for a negative deflection which implies when a paced beat is effective.4
In 18% of patients, device-reported % V. Pacing overestimated effective CRT by 3%. 3 out of 57 patients had virtually no effective pacing, whereas the % V pacing was > 90%, as demonstrated in the graph below.5
Only see the quantity of pacing5
Also see the quality of pacing5
Hayes DL, et al. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:1469-1475.
Daubert JC, et al. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9:1524–1576.
Brignole M, et al. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:2281–2329.
Ghosh S, et al. Europace. 2015;17:1555-1562.
Hernandez, et al. Presented at CardioStim 2016 (Abstract 99-06).