Long-Term Experience with a Preshaped Left Ventricular Pacing Lead

OLLITRAULT, J., et al. : Long-Term Experience with a Preshaped Left Ventricular Pacing Lead. This study describes a long-term experience with a new LV pacing lead. The study population consisted of 62 patients (85% men,   71 ± 10   years old) with advanced dilated cardiomyopathy, in NYHA Class III or IV despite optimal drug therapy, and a QRS duration >150 ms. Patients in sinus rhythm were implanted with a triple chamber pacemaker to maintain atrioventricular synchrony. A dual chamber pacemaker was implanted in patients in atrial fibrillation for biventricular pacing only. A clinical evaluation and interrogation of the resynchronization pacemaker were performed at implant, at 1 week (W1), one (M1), four (M4), and seven (M7) months after implantation. A longer follow-up (2 years) is available for patients implanted at the authors institution. LV measurements were pacing threshold at 0.5-ms pulse duration and pacing impedance. R wave amplitude (mV) was measured at the time of implantation only. The system was successfully implanted in 86% of patients with the latest design of the lead. Mean R wave amplitude at implant was   15 ± 7 mV   and mean pacing impedance was   1054 ± 254 Ω   . Between implant   (n = 38)   and M7   (n = 15)   , pacing threshold rose from   0.73 ± 0.54   to   1.57 ± 0.60 V (P < 0.001)   . In conclusion, the situs lead was successfully implanted in a high percentage of patients. In addition, low pacing threshold and high impedance measured during follow-up are consistent with a low pacing current drain, ensuring a durable pulse generator longevity. (PACE 2003; 26[Pt. II]:185–188)     

Similar Long-Term Benefits Conferred by Apical Versus Mid-Septal Implantation of the Right Ventricular Lead in Recipients of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Systems

Introduction: The benefits conferred by cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are markedly influenced by the left ventricular (LV) lead placement. Little is known regarding the optimal right ventricular (RV) stimulation site.
Study Objective: To compare the long-term outcomes of CRT in patients with RV leads placed in the mid-septal region versus the apex.
Methods and Results: This nonrandomized, observational study included 117 patients with standard indications for CRT. The LV lead was implanted on the postero-lateral or lateral LV wall, while the RV lead was implanted at the apex (n = 82) or in the mid-septum (n = 35). Both groups were similar with respect to baseline clinical, demographic, and echocardiographic characteristics. After 12 months of CRT, the rates of clinical response to CRT were similar in both groups (63% vs. 66%), and similar degrees of reverse LV remodeling and LV resynchronization were observed on echocardiography and color tissue Doppler imaging. A ≥30% relative increase in LV ejection fraction (EF) occurred in 76% of patients in the RV apex group, versus 49% of patients in the RV mid-septum group (P = 0.05). A ≥45% left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was measured at 12 months in 40% of patients in the RV apex group, versus 31% in the RV mid-septum group (ns).
Conclusions: RV mid-septal stimulation was not associated with a higher rate of response to CRT or greater improvement in LV function compared to RV apical stimulation.     

Bifocal Right Ventricular Resynchronization for the Failing Right Ventricle

The present case illustrates that in patients with right ventricular (RV) failure and right bundle branch block it is possible to resynchronize the RV without further worsening RV or left ventricular (LV) pump function, even in cases with various degrees of atrioventricular block. The acute response to different pacing configurations was analyzed in terms of dP/dt variations. Bifocal RV pacing (His bundle plus RV outflow tract pacing) achieved the best acute results and was chosen for permanent pacing. This pacing configuration was associated to clinical and echocardiographic improvement. (PACE 2011; 34:e78–e81)     

Usefulness of a Pacing Guidewire to Facilitate Left Ventricular Lead Implantation in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: Intraoperative measurements of left ventricular (LV) pacing and sensing values were assessed using a novel 0.014-inch guidewire (Visionwire^®, Biotronik GmbH, Berlin, Germany) enabling pacing and sensing at the distal tip before final LV lead implantation .
Methods: Twenty-two consecutive patients selected for cardiac resynchronization therapy were studied .
Results: Significant correlation was found between the LV pacing threshold as assessed by the Visionwire^® and values after final LV lead implantation (r = 0.92, P < 0.001). Correlation for LV sensing was also significant (r = 0.72, P < 0.001). No significant correlation was present with respect to phrenic nerve stimulation. However, no phrenic nerve stimulation at 10 V/0.5 ms using the Visionwire^® identified 88% of patients without phrenic nerve stimulation at 10 V/0.5 ms with subsequent LV lead measurements .
Conclusion: This technique may facilitate transvenous LV lead implantation by preventing implantation in a unsuitable target vessel with respect to pacing and sensing values or phrenic nerve stimulation, thereby reducing procedure and fluoroscopy time .     

Event-free survival following CRT with surgically implanted LV leads versus standard transvenous approach

Background: While surgical epicardial lead placement is performed in a subset of cardiac resynchronization therapy patients, data comparing survival following surgical versus transvenous lead placement are limited. We hypothesized that surgical procedures would be associated with increased mortality risk. Methods: Long‐term event‐free survival was assessed for 480 consecutive patients undergoing surgical (48) or percutaneous (432) left ventricle (LV) lead placement at our institution from January 2000 to September 2008. Results: Baseline clinical and demographic characteristics were similar between groups. While there was no statistically significant difference in overall event‐free survival (P = 0.13), when analysis was restricted to surgical patients with isolated surgical lead placement (n = 28), event‐free survival was significantly lower in surgical patients (P = 0.015). There appeared to be an early risk (first approximately 3 months postimplantation) with surgical lead placement, primarily in LV lead‐only patients. Event rates were significantly higher in LV lead‐only surgical patients than in transvenous patients in the first 3 months (P = 0.006). In proportional hazards analysis comparing isolated surgical LV lead placement to transvenous lead placement, adjusted hazard ratios were 1.8 ([1.1,2.7] P = 0.02) and 1.3 ([1.0,1.7] P = 0.07) for the first 3 months and for the full duration of follow‐up, respectively. Conclusions: Isolated surgical LV lead placement appears to carry a small but significant upfront mortality cost, with risk extending beyond the immediate postoperative period. Long‐term survival is similar, suggesting those surviving beyond this period of early risk derive the same benefit as coronary sinus lead recipients. Further work is needed to identify risk factors associated with early mortality following surgical lead placement. (PACE 2011; 34:490–500)     

Rates of upgrade of ICD recipients to CRT in clinical practice and the potential impact of the more liberal use of CRT at initial implant

Background: Many implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients may develop indications for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) during follow‐up. However, the actual upgrade rate during follow‐up in clinical practice is not known. Methods: We performed a single center retrospective observational study of all new ICD implants over 5 years (2003–2007). The rate of CRT upgrade of patients initially implanted with a single‐/dual‐chamber ICD during follow‐up was assessed. The impact of using alternative criteria on the need for CRT in ICD recipients at initial implant was also evaluated. Results: During the study period, there were 549 new ICD implants. The initial implant was a single/dual‐chamber ICD in 73% (n = 399) and a CRT‐D in 27% (n = 150). During follow‐up (48±20 months) of the 399 ICD recipients, 70 (17.5%) died and 15 (3.8%) were upgraded to CRT, including eight cases where left ventricular lead implant had been initially unsuccessful. Upgrade rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 0.03%, 2.4%, and 5.1%, respectively. Using alternative CRT criteria (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF]≤30%, QRS ≥130 ms, New York Heart Association I‐IV) 42.6% (n = 234) of ICD recipients met criteria for CRT at initial implant. Conclusion: In this retrospective single center study, rates of CRT upgrade in ICD recipients over the medium term were low, which may reflect underuse in otherwise appropriate candidates. The more liberal use of CRT at initial implant in patients with a reduced LVEF, a broad QRS, but only mild heart failure symptoms would require approximately 50% increase in CRT use in ICD recipients at initial implant, and may help address some of the suggested underutilization. (PACE 2012; 35:73–80)     

Is the Left Ventricular Lateral Wall the Best Lead Implantation Site for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy?

GASPARINI, M., et al .: Is the Left Ventricular Lateral Wall the Best Lead Implantation Site for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy? Short-term hemodynamic studies consistently report greater effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients stimulated from a LV lateral coronary sinus tributary (CST) compared to a septal site. The aim of the study was to compare the long-term efficacy of CRT when performed from different LV stimulation sites. From October 1999 to April 2002, 158 patients (mean age 65 years, mean LVEF 0.29, mean QRS width 174 ms) underwent successful CRT, from the anterior (A) CST in 21 patients, the anterolateral (AL) CST in 37 patients, the lateral (L) CST in 57 patients, the posterolateral (PL) CST in 40 patients, and the middle cardiac vein (MCV) CST in 3 patients. NYHA functional class, 6-minute walk test, and echocardiographic measurements were examined at baseline, and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Comparisons were made among all pacing sites or between lateral and septal sites by grouping AL + L + PL CST as lateral site (134 patients, 85%) and A + MC CST as septal site (24 patients, 15%). In patients stimulated from lateral sites, LVEF increased from 0.30 to 0.39   (P < 0.0001)   , 6-minute walk test from 323 to 458 m   (P < 0.0001)   , and the proportion of NYHA Class III–IV patients decreased from 82% to 10%   (P < 0.0001)   . In patients stimulated from septal sites, LVEF increased from 0.28 to 0.41   (P < 0.0001)   , 6-minute walk test from 314 to 494 m   (P < 0.0001)   , and the proportion of NYHA Class III–IV patients decreased from 75% to 23%   (P < 0.0001)   . A significant improvement in cardiac function and increase in exercise capacity were observed over time regardless of the LV stimulation sites, either considered singly or grouped as lateral versus septal sites. (PACE 2003; 26[Pt. II]:162–168)     

Long-Term Performance of the Attain Model 4193 Left Ventricular Lead

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has proven to be a valuable therapy addition for patients with drug-refractory heart failure and a ventricular conduction delay. Delivery of CRT is dependent upon the successful implantation and chronic performance of a left ventricular (LV) pacing lead. This study assessed the long-term electrical performance and safety of a steroid-eluting, transvenous, over-the-wire, cardiac vein pacing lead.
Methods: The Attain Model 4193 LV lead (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis MN, USA) was successfully implanted in 1,070 patients with 286 patients completing 3 years of follow-up. Clinical data were collected at pre-implant, implant, and at 6-month intervals for 3 years.
Results: Over 3 years, the mean chronic pacing threshold ranged from 1.9 V to 2.1 V, the mean R-wave sensing amplitudes ranged between 13.6 mV and 15.0 mV, and the mean pacing impedance ranged between 562 ohms and 590 ohms. Additionally, the observed freedom from first post-implant LV-lead-related complications was 90.4%. Of 1,070 total patients, 82 experienced 89 LV-lead-related adverse events requiring invasive interventions or resulting in the termination of the CRT therapy. The LV lead was repositioned in 31 patients, replaced in 21 patients, and explanted/capped in four patients. There were no deaths related to the LV lead during implantation or during the follow-up period.
Conclusions: The data suggest that the 4193 LV lead is safe and effective over time. The LV lead electrical measurements remained stable through follow-up, demonstrating reliable long-term performance within the recommended value range at 36 months and had an acceptable complication rate.     

A New Endocardial "Over-the-Wire" or Stylet-Driven Left Ventricular Lead:

Transvenous left ventricular (LV) leads are primarily inserted "over-the-wire" (OTW). However, a stylet-driven (SD) approach may be a helpful alternative. A new polyurethane-coated, unipolar LV lead can be placed either by a stylet or a guide wire, which can be inserted into the lead body from both ends. The multicenter OVID study evaluates the clinical performance of this new steroid- and nonsteroid eluting lead. The primary endpoint is the LV lead implant success rate after identification of the coronary sinus (CS). Secondary endpoints include complication rate, short- and long-term lead characteristics, overall procedure and LV lead placement duration, total fluoroscopy time, and lead handling characteristics ratings. To date, 96 patients with heart failure (68 ± 9 years old, 76% men) are enrolled. The CS was identified in 95 patients and, in 85 (88.5%), the LV lead was successfully implanted. The final lead positioning was lateral in 41%, posterolateral in 35%, anterolateral in 18%, and great cardiac vein in 6% of patients. In 70%, the 85 successful implantations, both stylet-driven and guide-wire techniques were used, a stylet only was used in 22%, and a guide wire only in 8%. Mean overall duration of 85 successful procedures was 112 ± 40 minutes, total fluoroscopy time 28 ± 15 minutes, and the duration of LV lead placement was 35 ± 29 minutes. During a 3-month follow-up, the loss of LV capture occurred in three and phrenic nerve stimulation in six patients. The mean long-term pacing threshold is 0.8 V/0.5 ms and pacing impedance is 550 Ω. The OVID data suggest that these new leads are safe and effective. The choice of both OTW and SD techniques during lead implantation offers greater procedural flexibility.     

Bifocal Right Ventricular Cardiac Resynchronization Therapies in Patients with Unsuccessful Percutaneous Lateral Left Ventricular Venous Access

Biventricular cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a lateral left ventricular (LV) lead cannot always be achieved. We report a single center experience of CRT utilizing a protocol that specifically required the implantation of a bifocal right ventricular (RV) lead system when lateral LV pacing could not be achieved. Consecutive candidates for CRT were included in the study. If strict criteria for lateral LV pacing were not met, they underwent implantation of a bifocal RV lead system with two 7F, active fixation leads, one placed septally at the apex, and the other in the high septal outflow tract. All patients were followed for 12 months and the two groups were compared. A biventricular (BiV) stimulation system was implanted in 44 patients, and a bifocal RV system in six. The demographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. Both groups experienced a similar improvement in functional capacity, increase in 6 minutes walking distance, and decreased need for hospitalizations. The mean increase in LV ejection fraction was 11% in the bifocal RV group versus 10% in the BiV group. Though the tissue Doppler indices of LV synchrony improved earlier in the BiV group, (19% vs 10%) the improvement was similar in both groups at 6 months (23% vs 20%). The clinical improvements conferred by CRT can be matched by a bifocal RV system in selected patients. This alternate approach should be considered when implantation of a LV lateral lead was unsuccessful.     

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Right Ventricular Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy

Background: It is not known whether patients with normal baseline left ventricular (LV) function who develop right ventricular (RV) pacing-induced cardiomyopathy as a result of dual-chamber pacing can benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We retrospectively assessed the effect of a CRT upgrade on RV pacing-induced cardiomyopathy.
Methods and Results: We reviewed the charts of patients who received a CRT device for RV pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. We assessed the effects of CRT on LV function, recovery, and other response parameters. From September 2005 through February 2009, 21 patients (13 men; aged 63 ± 9 years) underwent a treatment upgrade to a CRT system. Before the dual-chamber pacemaker was implanted, the LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was 53 ± 2.3%. After pacing, the LVEF was 31.2 ± 3.8%, the LV end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) was 5.8 ± 0.5 cm, and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels were 426 ± 149 pg/mL. The duration of pacing before documentation of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy was 3.8 ± 1.5 months. All the patients had been on a stable medical regimen for at least 2 months. After the upgrade to CRT, the follow-up time was 4.9 ± 0.9 months. Sixteen patients (76%) reported a significant improvement in their symptoms. After the CRT upgrade, the LVEF increased to 37.4 ± 9.0% (P < 0.01 vs pre-CRT). The LVEDD decreased to 5.0 ± 1.0 cm (P = 0.03 vs pre-CRT), and BNP levels decreased to 139 ± 92 pg/mL (P = 0.08 vs pre-CRT).
Conclusion: A CRT upgrade is an effective treatment for RV pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and should be implemented as soon as the diagnosis is established. Unfortunately, about 24% of our patients did not respond to the upgrade. (PACE 2010; 37–40)     

Balloon‐Facilitated Delivery of a Left Ventricular Pacing Lead

While modern implant tools have contributed greatly to the success of cardiac resynchronization therapy, technical challenges remain. A common problem is the inability to advance left ventricular pacing leads into branch veins that are tortuous or arise at steep angles. In these cases, advancement of the lead causes it to buckle and prolapse into the coronary sinus or great cardiac vein. Lead prolapsed can be avoided by employing a balloon to temporarily obstruct the coronary sinus or great cardiac vein just upstream from the branch vein. The balloon redirects the force of advancement laterally into the branch vein, facilitating delivery. (PACE 2013; 36:e31–e34)     

Right Ventricular Myocardial Function in Patients with Either Idiopathic or Ischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy Without Clinical Sign of Right Heart Failure: Effects of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Objective: In dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), right ventricular (RV) dysfunction has been reported and attributed both to altered loading conditions and to RV involvement in the myopathic process. The aim of the study was to detect RV myocardial function in DCM using two‐dimensional (2D) strain echocardiography and to assess the effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on RV myocardial strain during a 6‐month follow‐up. Methods and Results: A total of 110 patients (mean age: 55.4 ± 11.2 years) with either idiopathic (n = 60) or ischemic (n = 50) DCM, without overt clinical signs of RV failure, underwent standard echo and 2D strain analysis of RV longitudinal strain in RV septal and lateral walls. The two groups were comparable for clinical variables (New York Heart Association class III in 81.8%). Left ventricular volumes, ejection fraction, stroke volume, and mitral valve effective regurgitant orifice were similar between the two groups. No significant differences were evidenced in Doppler mitral and tricuspid inflow measurements. RV diameters were mildly increased in patients with idiopathic DCM, while RV tricuspid annulus systolic excursion and Tei‐index were comparable between the two groups. RV global longitudinal strain and regional peak myocardial strain were significantly impaired in patients with idiopathic DCM compared with those having ischemic DCM (all P < 0.001). Using left ventricular end‐systolic volume as marker for response to CRT, 70 patients (63.3%) were long‐term responders. Ischemic DCM patient responders to CRT showed a significant improvement in RV peak systolic strain. Conversely, in patients with idiopathic DCM and in ischemic patients nonresponders to CRT, no improvement in RV function was evidenced. By multivariable analysis, in the overall population, ischemic etiology of DCM (P < 0.0001), positive response to CRT (P < 0.001), and longitudinal intraventricular dyssynchrony (P <0.01) emerged as the only independent determinants of RV global longitudinal strain after CRT. Conclusions: Two‐dimensional strain represents a promising noninvasive technique to assess RV myocardial function in patients with DCM. RV myocardial deformation at baseline and after CRT are more impaired in idiopathic compared with ischemic DCM patients. Future longitudinal studies are warranted to understand the natural history of RV myocardial function, the extent of reversibility of RV dysfunction with CRT, and the possible prognostic impact of such indexes in patients with congestive heart failure.     

Upgrading from Single Chamber Right Ventricular to Biventricular Pacing in Permanently Paced Patients with Worsening Heart Failure: The RD-CHF Study

Background: Biventricular (BiV) stimulation lowers morbidity and mortality in patients with drug-refractory congestive heart failure (CHF), depressed left ventricular (LV) function, and ventricular dyssynchrony in absence of indication for permanent cardiac pacing. This pilot, single-blind, randomized, cross-over study examined the safety and efficacy of upgrading conventional pacing systems to BiV stimulation in patients with advanced CHF .
Methods: We included 56 patients in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classes III or IV despite optimal drug treatment and ventricular dyssynchrony (interventriclar delay >40 ms or LV preejection delay >140 ms) in need of pacemaker replacement. We compared the patients' functional status, arrhythmias, and standard echocardiographic measurements during 3 months of conventional, single right ventricular (RV) versus 3 months of BiV stimulation .
Results: There were 44 patients in the cross-over phase. QRS duration was shortened by 23% and LV preejection delay by 16% with BiV stimulation. NYHA functional class, 6-minute hall walk and quality of life score were significantly improved with BiV stimulation compared with single RV pacing by 18%, 29%, and 19%, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the ventricular arrhythmia burden or LV reverse remodeling between the 2 periods .
Conclusions: This pilot study showed that upgrading from RV pacing to BiV pacing significantly improves symptoms and exercise tolerance in chronically paced patients with advanced CHF and mechanical dyssynchrony .     

Right ventricular dysfunction is a predictor of non-response and clinical outcome following cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment in advanced heart failure (HF). However, an important subset does not derive a significant benefit. Despite an established predictive role in HF, the significance of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction in predicting clinical benefit from CRT remains unclear. We investigated the role of RV function, assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), in predicting response to and major adverse clinical events in HF patients undergoing CRT.

Methods

Sixty consecutive patients were evaluated with CMR prior to CRT implantation in a tertiary cardiac centre. The primary end-point was a composite of death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for a major cardiovascular event. The secondary end-point was response to therapy, defined as improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 5% on echocardiography at one year.

Results

Eighteen patients (30%) met the primary end-point over a median follow-up period of 26 months, and 27 out of 56 patients (48%) were considered responders to CRT. On time-to-event analysis, only atrial fibrillation (HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.02-6.84, p = 0.047) and RV dysfunction, either by a reduced right ventricular ejection fraction-RVEF (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.99, p = 0.006) or tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion-TAPSE (HR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.80-0.96, p = 0.006), were significant predictors of adverse events. On logistic regression analysis, preserved RVEF (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09, p = 0.01) and myocardial scar burden (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.96, p = 0.004) were the sole independent predictors of response to CRT. Patients with marked RV dysfunction (RVEF < 30%) had a particularly low response rate (18.2%) to CRT.

Conclusions

Right ventricular function is an important predictor of both response to CRT and long-term clinical outcome. Routine assessment of the right ventricle should be considered in the evaluation of patients for CRT.     

The rationale and design of the SMART CRT trial

Aims

The SMART CRT study will assess the efficacy of an atrioventricular optimization algorithm to improve reverse remodeling among patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in the presence of interventricular electrical delay.

Methods and results

The SMART CRT study is a global, multicenter, prospective, randomized study of patients undergoing CRT implantation. The primary endpoint of this trial is response rate to CRT, defined as decrease in left ventricular end‐systolic volume (LVESV) ≥15% at 6 months compared to preimplant baseline. Additional prespecified analyses are: (1) clinical composite endpoint combining all‐cause mortality, heart failure events, New York Heart Association class, and Quality of Life (using a patient global assessment instrument); (2) the individual components of the clinical composite endpoint; (3) 6‐minute walk distance; (4) Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; (5) LVESV as a continuous variable; and (6) absolute left‐ventricular ejection fraction. Subjects with intraventricular delay ≥ 70 ms measured between the right ventricular and left ventricular pacing leads will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to have either an AV Delay and pacing chamber determined by SmartDelay? or a Fixed AV Delay of 120 ms with biventricular pacing. Enrollment of an estimated 726 of subjects from up to 100 centers worldwide is planned to achieve 436 randomized subjects and 370 complete data sets required to power the primary endpoint.

Conclusions

This trial will provide important data regarding the importance of AV Delay programming in patients with prolonged interventricular delay at the pacing sites.

     

Long‐Term Effects of Upgrading to Biventricular Pacing: Differences with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy as Primary Indication

Background: Few studies have assessed the long‐term effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) and previously right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP). Aims: To assess the clinical and hemodynamic impact of upgrading to biventricular pacing in patients with severe HF and permanent RVAP in comparison with patients who had CRT implantation as initial therapy. Methods and Results: Thirty‐nine patients with RVAP, advanced HF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] III–IV), and severe depression of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were upgraded to biventricular pacing (group A). Mean duration of RVAP before upgrading was 41.8 ± 13.3 months. Clinical and echocardiographic results were compared to those obtained in a group of 43 patients with left bundle branch block and similar clinical characteristics undergoing “primary” CRT (group B). Mean follow‐up was 35 ± 10 months in patients of group A and 38 ± 12 months in group B. NYHA class significantly improved in groups A and B. LVEF increased from 0.23 ± 0.07 to 0.36 ± 0.09 (P < 0.001) and from 0.26 ± 0.02 to 0.34 ± 0.10 (P < 0.001), respectively. Hospitalizations were reduced by 81% and 77% (P < 0.001). Similar improvements in echocardiographic signs of ventricular desynchronization were also observed. Conclusion: Patients upgraded to CRT exhibit long‐term clinical and hemodynamic benefits that are similar to those observed in patients treated with CRT as initial strategy. (PACE 2010; 841–849)