title: Effect of ventricular leads position on the clinic outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy.
abstract: The RV lead position, either RVA or RVHS appears to make no difference in the response to CRT but the LV lead placement play a vital role.9,30 The latest activated regions of LV or areas without transmural myocardial scar for an optimal CRT are preferred. Currently, data demonstrate that no significant difference of clinical outcomes in posterior, anterior, and lateral LV lead position was found, while the ideal pacing site of the LV should be avoided in the apex position as suggested in COMPANION trial and MADIT-CRT trial. And dual-site LV CRT, which is a new technique, is also still in progress and we are looking forward to getting more updates from that.
authors: Department of Cardiology, First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
authors: Ying-xue
authors: YX
authors: Dong
authors: Javin
authors: J
authors: Boodhna
authors: Yan-zong
authors: YZ
authors: Yang
mesh_terms: D058406:Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy; D058409:Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices; D006333:Heart Failure / Q000628:therapy*; D006352:Heart Ventricles; D006439:Hemodynamics; D006801:Humans; D016896:Treatment Outcome