Historically, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response in non‐left bundle branch block (non‐LBBB) patients has been suboptimal in comparison with that observed in left bundle branch block patients. The electrical activation… Click to show full abstract
Historically, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response in non‐left bundle branch block (non‐LBBB) patients has been suboptimal in comparison with that observed in left bundle branch block patients. The electrical activation pattern of the left ventricle (LV) is different between these two QRS morphologies. Small non‐randomized studies have suggested that targeting the LV wall with greatest electrical delay may be superior to conventional anatomical pacing from the lateral wall in non‐LBBB patients. This article outlines the design and rationale of a prospective, randomized, pilot study, which assesses the effect of a non‐traditional LV lead implant strategy on the clinical composite score after 12 months of follow‐up in a non‐LBBB patient population.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.