Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 7, 2026

Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
Biventricular pacing improves the blunted force-frequency relation present during univentricular pacing in patients
Dirk Vollmann1, Lars Lüthje, Peter Schott
1Department of Cardiology and Pneumology, Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany. DirkVollmann2000@aol.com
Insights
Biventricular pacing improves heart function as heart rate increases in chronic heart failure patients, unlike single-site pacing. This suggests biventricular pacing offers a functional benefit for resynchronization therapy.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Electrophysiology
- Heart Failure Management
Background:
- Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and conduction delay often have impaired systolic function.
- Biventricular (BiV) and left ventricular (LV) pacing improve systolic function at rest in these patients.
- The effect of pacing on contractile function at increasing heart rates is not well understood.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the differential effects of BiV and univentricular pacing on cardiac contractile function at increasing heart rates in CHF patients.
- To compare the force-frequency relationship during BiV, LV, and right ventricular (RV) pacing.
Main Methods:
- Twenty-two CHF patients underwent cardiac catheterization.
- Left ventricular (LV) hemodynamics were measured during BiV, LV, and RV stimulation at varying heart rates (80, 100, 120, 140 bpm).
- Key parameters assessed included LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP), LV systolic pressure (LVSP), and dP/dtmax.
Main Results:
- BiV and LV pacing equally augmented dP/dtmax at 80 bpm compared to baseline and RV pacing.
- Increasing heart rate from 80 to 140 bpm significantly enhanced dP/dtmax during BiV pacing.
- No significant improvement in contractility was observed during single-site LV or RV pacing as heart rate increased.
- At 140 bpm, BiV pacing resulted in lower LVEDP and higher LVSP compared to RV and LV pacing.
Conclusions:
- Ventricular stimulation modes alter the in vivo force-frequency relation in CHF patients.
- Contractile function improves with increasing heart rates during BiV stimulation, unlike single-site pacing.
- This enhanced response may contribute to improved exercise capacity and offers a potential benefit over LV-only pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Background:
In patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and conduction delay, biventricular (BiV) and left ventricular (LV) pacing similarly improve systolic function at resting heart rates. We hypothesized that BiV and univentricular pacing differentially affect contractile function at increasing heart rates.
Methods And Results:
Twenty-two patients (aged 66+/-2 years, QRS 179+/-8 ms, LV ejection fraction 23+/-1%) underwent cardiac catheterization before device implantation to measure LV hemodynamics at baseline (rate 68+/-2 bpm; sinus rhythm n=18; atrial fibrillation n=4) and during BiV, LV, and right ventricular (RV) stimulation at 80, 100, 120, and 140 bpm. BiV and LV pacing at 80 bpm equally augmented dP/dtmax as compared with baseline and RV pacing (P<0.001). Stimulation rate significantly interacted with the effect of BiV, LV, and RV pacing on LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP), systolic pressure (LVSP), and dP/dtmax. Increasing the rate from 80 to 140 bpm enhanced dP/dtmax from 913+/-28 to 1119+/-50 mm Hg/s during BiV stimulation (P<0.001) but had no significant effect on contractility during single-site LV (951+/-47 versus 1002+/-54 mm Hg/s) or RV (800+/-46 versus 881+/-49 mm Hg/s) pacing. At 140 bpm, LVEDP was lower and LVSP higher during BiV pacing than during RV and LV pacing (LVEDP 12+/-1 versus 17+/-1 and 16+/-1 mm Hg, P<0.001; LVSP 112+/-5 versus 106+/-5 and 108+/-6 mm Hg, P<0.01 and P=0.09; BiV versus RV and LV pacing, respectively).
Conclusions:
Different modes of ventricular stimulation alter the in vivo force-frequency relation of CHF patients. In contrast to single-site LV and RV pacing, contractile function improves with increasing heart rates during BiV stimulation. This effect may contribute to the enhanced exercise capacity during BiV pacing and could provide a functional benefit over LV-only pacing in patients for whom resynchronization therapy is indicated.
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure Drugs: Inotropic Agents
Heart Failure Drugs: β-Blockers
Disturbances in Heart Rhythm
Arrhythmias are categorized by their speed, rhythm, and origin. A slow heart...
Dysrhythmias IV: Characteristics of Bradyarrhythmias
Heart Failure II: Pathophysiology
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies

