Overview
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
You can now verify effective pacing with the EffectivCRT Diagnostic
The EffectivCRT™ Diagnostic uses a unipolar electrogram to evaluate morphology, looking for a negative deflection which implies when a paced beat is effective.4
- This EGM strip shows 6 consecutive paced beats
- Traditional pacing counters would report this as 100% V. pacing
- With the EffectivCRT Diagnostic, it would report 100% V pacing but 50% is effective pacing
- The first 3 beats are ineffective (positive deflection implies tissue is paced and not captured)
- The last 3 beats are effective (negative deflection implies tissue is paced and captured)
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
Before the
EffectivCRT™ diagnostic:
Only see the quantity of pacing5
With the
EffectivCRT™ diagnostic:
Also see the quality of pacing5
You can use the data provided by the EffectivCRT Diagnostic to identify ineffective pacing and will find it in these places:
- Cardiac Compass™ Trends
- Quick Look™ II Screen
- Rate Histogram Report
- EffectivCRT Episodes
1
Hayes DL, et al. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:1469-1475.
2
Daubert JC, et al. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9:1524–1576.
3
Brignole M, et al. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:2281–2329.
4
Ghosh S, et al. Europace. 2015;17:1555-1562.
5
Hernandez, et al. Presented at CardioStim 2016 (Abstract 99-06).