Heart failure (HF) can be either induced or aggravated by the existence of left ventricular (LV) intraventricular dyssynchrony (IVD). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can potentially correct LV-IVD in well-characterized populations (see current Guidelines). CRT has demonstrated clear benefits in both soft (NYHA class, 6MWT, QoL) and hard (all cause mortality, 6 months hospitalizations) randomized control trial (RCT) endpoints. The standard approach is to deliver a unipolar (UP)/bipolar (BP) dedicated LV-lead via the coronary sinus (CS) into a postero-lateral (PL) tributary vein.
Suboptimal LV-lead positioning has been long recognized as an important cause of CRT non-response. Optimal, delay targeted LV-lead placement might sometimes only be possible with non-standard techniques due to various patient particularities. We decided to retrospectively evaluate the frequencies and types of techniques we used in over a decade of CRT experience in our centre. "Alternative CRT" is not yet a coined term. We defined unexpendable variations from the straightforward technique as alternative pathways of delivering CRT.