Despite the strict indications for cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) implantation, a significant proportion of patients will fail to adequately respond to the treatment. This systematic review aims to present the existing evidence about the role of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in identifying patients who are likely to respond better to the CRT.
MethodsA systematic search in the MedLine database and Cochrane Library from their inception to August 2021 was performed, without any limitations, by two independent investigators. We considered eligible observational studies or randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that enrolled patients >18 years old with HF of ischemic or non-ischemic etiology and provided data about the association of baseline CMR variables with clinical or echocardiographic response to CRT for at least 3 months. This systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA Statement).
ResultsFollowing our search strategy, 47 studies were finally included in our review. CMR appears to have an additive role in identifying the subgroup of patients who will respond better to CRT. Specifically, the presence and the extent of myocardial scar associatewith increased nonresponse rates, whilst those with no scar respond better. Furthermore, existing data show that scar location can be associated with CRT response rates. CMR-derived markers of mechanical desynchrony can also be used as predictors of CRT response. CMR data can be used to optimise the position of the left ventricular lead during the CRT implantation procedure. Specifically, positioning the left ventricular lead in a branch of the coronary sinus that feeds an area with transmural scar associate with poorer response to CRT.
ConclusionsCMR can be used as a non-invasive optimisation tool to identify patients who are more likely to achieve better clinical and echocardiographic response following CRT implantation.