Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Real-Time Cardiac Mapping with a Noninvasive Imageless Electrocardiographic Imaging System
Published on: April 11, 2025
Event-free survival following CRT with surgically implanted LV leads versus standard transvenous approach
Amy L Miller1, Daniel B Kramer, Eldrin F Lewis
1Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Division, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. almiller@partners.org
Insights
Surgical left ventricle (LV) lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy may increase early mortality risk, especially for isolated procedures. However, long-term survival is comparable to transvenous methods for those who overcome initial risks.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
- Medical Devices
Background:
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a treatment for heart failure.
- Surgical epicardial lead placement is an alternative to transvenous lead placement for CRT.
- Limited data exist comparing survival outcomes between surgical and transvenous lead placement methods.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare long-term event-free survival between surgical and transvenous left ventricle (LV) lead placement in CRT patients.
- To investigate the hypothesis that surgical lead placement is associated with increased mortality risk.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective analysis of 480 consecutive patients undergoing surgical (n=48) or transvenous (n=432) LV lead placement between January 2000 and September 2008.
- Assessment of long-term event-free survival.
- Proportional hazards analysis to compare outcomes between groups, with a focus on early post-implantation risk.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant difference in overall event-free survival between surgical and transvenous groups (P = 0.13).
- Isolated surgical LV lead placement (n=28) was associated with significantly lower event-free survival (P = 0.015).
- Higher event rates were observed in isolated surgical LV lead-only patients compared to transvenous patients within the first 3 months post-implantation (P = 0.006).
Conclusions:
- Isolated surgical LV lead placement carries a small but significant upfront mortality risk.
- Long-term survival appears similar between surgical and transvenous lead placement methods for patients who survive the initial risk period.
- Further research is needed to identify specific risk factors for early mortality following surgical lead placement.
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.
More Related Videos
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
08:42Cox-Maze IV Procedure Concomitant with Valvular Surgery In Situs Inversus Dextrocardia: A Single-Center Experience in China
Published on: February 11, 2022