Can VO2 maximum be used as an indicator for CRT response. Version: 0.7
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Can VO2 maximum be used to assess the physiological and symptomatic response to a Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy (CRT) device implant?
IRAS ID
241067
Contact name
Paulo Dias da Costa
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
St Georges University of London
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 6 months, 25 days
Research summary
The study will take place in a tertiary centre hospital in South London using retrospective data from patients who had a CRT implant between the years of Jan 2013-Jan 2015. The data collected will include, ECG's, date of implant, echocardiogram reports and NYHA classification.
The study will assess whether a VO2 maximum value obtained from a Cardiac Pulmonary Exercise Test can be used to assess the response a patient may have to a Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy (CRT) device. VO2 maximum is a value which provides information on how well the heart muscle, lungs and muscles work in allowing oxygen to move around the body during exercise.
CRT is the chosen management option for patients who suffer from systolic heart failure. Zannad et al (2007) found that 25% of patients who suffer from HF. Many HF patients also have a left bundle branch block whereby there is a delay in the activation of the left ventricle. Abraham, W. T, Hayes, D. A, (2003) reported that a CRT device works by re-establishing the mechanical synchronisation of the heart through electrical activation, thus allowing for the synchronous contraction of both ventricles, in turn allowing for improvement in ejection of blood and thus patient symptoms, which will be measured using an echocardiogram and NYHA class.
This study may help triage patients to allow those patients who truly need a CRT to be put first, reducing the waiting times for a CRT on the NHS and reduce NHS costs as the average cost of a complete CRT-P system is estimated around £3411 and a CRT-D is estimated around £12,293.REC name
East of England - Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
18/EE/0053
Date of REC Opinion
8 Feb 2018
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion