Secondary Logo

Journal Logo


Usefulness of plasma B type natriuretic peptide as a predictor to identify responders following CRT

Nawar, Amr*; Samy, Wael; Elaasar, Hisham; Rizk, Amal; Mokhtar, Sherif

Author Information
The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine: August 2016 - Volume 4 - Issue 2 - p 97-103
doi: 10.1016/j.ejccm.2016.05.003
  • Open


1. Introduction

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapy for patients with moderate-to-severe heart failure (HF) and ventricular dyssynchrony. CRT improves Cardiac function, quality of life (QoL), and life expectancy in patients with HF [1–4]. Biventricular pacing improves symptoms (New York Heart Association [NYHA] class), exercise tolerance (6-min walk distance), and quality-of-life scores by decreasing dyssynchrony in patients with advanced chronic HF [5–7]. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) optimizes ventricular loading conditions, improves systolic function, and reduces mitral regurgitation, thereby leading to reverse remodeling [5,6,8].

However, lack of response to CRT has been reported in up to 30% of patients [6,8,9]. On the basis of these considerations, a variety of parameters, including echocardiographic ventricular dyssynchrony [10], QRS reduction after implantation [11], and the location and extent of myocardial scarring [12], have been reported to be predictors of the response to CRT, but disappointing results from PROSPECT study indicated the limitation of these parameters [13].

There has been growing interest in identifying new markers for dyssynchrony and the techniques to optimize device settings to increase the true-responder rate, in addition to optimal medical management [14–17]. CRT-induced reverse remodeling could reduce neurohormonal activity in addition to improving anatomic and functional parameters.

Brain natriuretic peptides (BNP) and its inactive amino terminal portion (NT-pro BNP), are neurohormones released by the ventricle in response to increase LV wall stress. Hence, BNP level may play a valuable role for the assessment of cardiac dysfunction, particularly LV dysfunction, and for monitoring of the response to cardiac therapy [18,19]. Decrease in BNP associated with drug treatment in patients with CHF correlates with improvement in hemodynamic parameters [20–22], clinical status and prognosis, including number of hospitalizations for deterioration of CHF [23,24]. Fruhwald et al. [25] showed that CRT leads to an early and sustained decrease in NT-pro BNP potentially reflecting improvement in LV function. In responders, left lateral wall pacing increases systolic function, reduces mitral regurgitation (MR) and thus decrease the wall motion stress. In this favorable remodeling process, neurohumoral activity is reduced and the decrease in plasma B-type natriuretic peptide after initiation of CRT predicts clinical improvement during follow-up [26].

1.1. Aim of work

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of CRT on plasma concentrations of β-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and the value of BNP in predicting the clinical response to CRT.

2. Patients and methods

Over a period of one year from September 2012 to November 2013, thirty patients who received a biventricular pacing system were studied. They included 27 males and 3 females, with a mean age of 57.5±6years.

The patients were studied at the (Critical care department) Cairo University.

2.1. Inclusion criteria

  • Advanced CHF (NYHA class II-IV) despite optimized drug therapy including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or Angiotensin receptor antagonists, diuretics, beta-receptor blockers and spironolactone when tolerated.
  • Intraventricular conduction delay (QRS≥120ms) in the form of left bundle branch block.
  • Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% as assessed by echocardiography.

2.2. Exclusion criteria

(1) Patients with uncontrolled HF requiring hospital admission or not on stable medical therapy for the last three months; (2) serum creatinine level ≥2mg/dl; (3) myocardial infarction within previous 3months; (4) previous valve replacement or reconstructions.

2.2.1. The studied patients were subjected to baseline assessment including

Informed written consent, Full history taking and clinical examination, twelve lead ECG, NYHA class, blood pressure, heart rate, CHF compensation status and QRS duration were assessed during each clinical follow-up visit, and their exercise capacity was assessed by a 6-min walk test.

2.3. All patients were subjected to

2.3.1. Biochemical assays

BNP level was assessed in the absence of uncontrolled HF one to 10days before implantation. Blood samples were drawn from an antecubital vein in the morning before and 3months after the implant. Blood for measurement of plasma BNP was transferred to a chilled tube containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) (1mg/ml) and aprotinin (500 kallikrein inactivator U/mL). Test tubes were immediately centrifuged. Plasma samples were stored at −70°C until assay. Plasma BNP concentrations were measured using a specific immunoradiometric assay (non-extracted) for human BNP. (RayBio®, USA) done at our unit Lab. The analysis was blind to the outcome.

2.3.2. Echocardiographic measurements

All patients were subjected to transthoracic echocardiographic examination using ATL.HDI 5000 colored echocardiographic machine using a 3.5MHz transducer (PHILIPS).

Two-dimensional Doppler-flow echocardiography was performed at baseline and at follow up to assess left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EA), diastolic dimensions and the degree of mitral regurgitation quantification (from grade 1 to 4). LVEF was calculated using the single plane method. The analysis was blinded to the outcome.

2.4. Study protocol

Peripheral blood samples for analysis of BNP were drawn at baseline and 3months after initiation of CRT. At baseline, history, clinical status, drug therapy, echocardiographic parameters and Exercise capacity testing were evaluated. Three months after implantation of the CRT system, clinical status, drug therapy and echocardiographic data were assessed.

2.5. Criteria to define responders

2.5.1. Clinical criteria

  • >1 point decrease in NYHA functional class [27,28].

2.5.2. Echocardiographic criteria

  • A reduction of LVESV by 15% or greater after CRT [13,29,30].

2.6. Statistical analysis

Quantitative variables are expressed as mean value±SD, whereas qualitative variables are expressed as number and percentage. Descriptive analysis was performed for all relevant continuous variables. Comparison between groups was done using chi-square for qualitative variables & independent samples, T-test for normally distributed quantitative variables. Quantitative variables not normally distributed were compared using non-parametrical Mann–Whitney test & Kruskal–Wallis Test. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine the predictors of responders for CRT. To evaluate the predictive value of changes in plasma BNP levels, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed, the area under the curve (AUC) calculated and possible cut off points were selected. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. All data were analyzed using the SPSS v. 12.0 statistical packages.

3. Results

3.1. Demographic data

Age of patients undergoing the study ranged from 42 to 70years with a mean of 57.5±6.6years, (90%) were males and 3 (10%) were females (Table 1).

Table 1
Table 1:
Baseline data.

3.1.1. Clinical presentation Underlying heart disease causing heart failure.

Of the study group 17 patients (56.7%) had Ischemic heart disease, while 13 (43.3%) were non-ischemic (Fig. 1).

Figure 1
Figure 1:
Presence of ischemic heart disease (IHD). As shown in the figure there was no significant difference in the number of patients having IHD in the study population. NYHA class before PM implantation.

Prior to implantation 23 patients (76%) had NYHA class III while 2 patients (6%) had NYHA class II and 5 patients had ambulatory NYHA class IV (16%). Type of pacemaker implanted.

Twenty-eight patients (93.3%) had received a CRT-P System, whereas 2 patients (6.7%) had a CRT-D (see Table 2).

Table 2
Table 2:
Baseline parameters.

3.1.2. CRT response

Among the 30 patients included in this study, 22 (73.3%) were considered Responders to CRT (see Fig. 2).

Figure 2
Figure 2:
ROC curve showing BNP level at follow-up. Baseline echocardiographic parameters.

Baseline LV volumes and LVEF, were not significantly different between responders and non-responders (see Fig. 4).

Figure 4
Figure 4:
Correlation between changes in LVEF and plasma levels BNP at follow-up (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). Underlying cause for heart failure.

There was no statistical difference regarding etiology of heart failure between the two groups (p value=0.407) (see Fig. 3).

Figure 3
Figure 3:
Correlation between changes in LVEDV and plasma levels of BNP at followup (r = 0.75, p < 0.001). Baseline QRS width.

As seen in the only baseline parameter that was highly significant between Responders and non-Responders prior to CRT implantation was QRS width in surface ECG. The Baseline QRS width ranged between 130–170ms with a mean of 143±12 in responders, and ranged between 150–180ms. in non-responders mean 165±10.69) P value was <0.001.

3.1.3. BNP at baseline and after follow-up

At Baseline the mean BNP level was 464.55±80pg/ml in Responders and 409±94pg/ml in Non-Responders with no statistical difference between the two groups (p value 0.120).

However at follow up, only the Responders showed a significant decrease in plasma BNP levels (229.64pg/ml±111) as compared to Non-Responders (468pg/ml±96), P value<0.001.

In order to assess the predictive value of the change in BNP in differentiating responders and non-responders, ROC curve and AUC parameters were analyzed.

  • Percent change in BNP (ΔBNP%) was associated with the largest AUC (1.000, 95% confidence interval 0.883–1), followed by absolute change in BNP (BNP pg/ml) (AUC=0.943, 95% confidence interval 0.793–0.992). A drop in ΔBNP% of more than 4.615% differentiated responders from non-responders with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity.
  • A cut-off BNP value of 360pg/ml had a specificity of 87.5% and a sensitivity of 90.9% in predicting CRT response.

3.1.4. Improvement in echo parameters at follow-up

A statistically significant decrease in left ventricular volumes LVEDV (298.6±42ml vs. 243.3±37ml p<0.001) and LVESV (209.5±36ml vs. 149±28ml, p<0.001), together with an improvement in LVEF (29±4% vs. 38±4%, p<0.001).

3.1.5. QRS width

As seen in Table 3 the mean QRS width decreased at follow up mainly among the Responders.

Table 3
Table 3:
Follow-up parameters among responders and non-responders.

3.1.6. Correlation between BNP level and LV volumes and ejection fraction at follow-up

The change in BNP level at follow up had high negative correlation with the change in LVEF (r=−0.7194, P<0.001) and a high positive correlation with LV end-diastolic volume (r=0.7504, P<0.001) and LV end-systolic volume (r=0.74360.45, P<0.001).

3.1.7. Correlation between change of BNP level and change of 6 min walk test at follow up

The plasma BNP levels at follow up also showed high negative correlation with the 6min walk test at follow up r=−0.681 with p value <0.001.

3.1.8. Correlation between QRS width at follow up and LV volumes and ejection fraction.

There was high positive correlation between QRS width in surface ECG at follow up with both LV volumes (EDV, ESV) r=0.473 and 0.616 and negative correlation with EF r=−0.687 with p-value<0.001. 6 min walk test.

The QRS width at follow up had a negative correlation with the 6min walk test at follow up r=−0.68132 with p value <0.001 (see Table 4).

Table 4
Table 4:
Comparison between the previous studies and the current cohort.

4. Discussion

Landmark clinical trials such as COMPANION [9] and CARE-HF [10] have shown a survival benefit with CRT. This therapy has opened up a whole new modality in the treatment of HF, focusing on electromechanical assistance to the failing heart.

Although the clinical results of CRT are promising, analysis of individual responses has revealed that almost 30% of patients do not exhibit any symptomatic or hemodynamic improvement: the so-called non-responders [31–33]. One of the reasons for this may be suboptimal programing of the device, which has particular considerations as compared to standard pacemakers [34].

Plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is a very useful diagnostic and prognostic marker in stratifying HF patients and guiding optimization of HF treatment. BNP levels correlate well with functional class and hemodynamics and is an independent prognostic indicator in patients with congestive HF, however, the predictive role of preimplantation BNP determination remains unclear [35,36].

5. Main finding

The main finding of our study was that CRT exerted a substantial reduction in plasma BNP levels in responders, but no significant change in non-responders after 3months follow-up and that change in plasma BNP level between baseline and 3months after CRT may be useful to identify echocardiographic responders following CRT.

Filzmaier et al. [37] showed significant reductions in BNP levels after only 4–6days of continuous biventricular pacing. Mortada et al. [38] noted significant reductions (P<0.05) in plasma BNP levels from baseline to 3-month follow-up in 87% of their study participants.

Sinha et al. [39] in 2003 documented significant reductions in BNP levels associated with significant reductions in LV volume and a significant increase in ejection fraction, which remained consistent throughout long-term follow-up (>1year) in patients treated with biventricular pacing.

Fruhwald et al. [25] in 2007 in a study on patients with moderate or severe HF and LV dyssynchrony showed that CRT exerts an early and sustained reduction in BNP level reflecting the improvements in LV geometry and function. Moreover, the Care-HF post-hoc analysis concluded that BNP may be used to monitor CRT effect [40].

Indeed, response to CRT is clearly a multifactorial process including the severity of intraventricular asynchrony, presence and localization of LV viability and lead placement with respect to the latest LV activation site. In contrast, BNP release is essentially determined by LV wall stress. Hence, it is not surprising that baseline BNP is not accurate to predict clinical or echocardiographic response after CRT [41].

5.1. LV remodeling

Furthermore, our results showed that BNP is also a good surrogate marker to identify LV remodeling following CRT as it showed strong correlations with both LV volumes; LVEDV (r=0.7504, P<0.001), LVESV (r=0.74360.45, P<0.001) and LVEF (r=−0.7194, P<0.001). More importantly, BNP monitoring allows the clinician to accurately identify echocardiographic responders to CRT. Since LV remodeling predicts outcome with better accuracy than clinical improvement after CRT and that BNP monitoring can identify echocardiographic responders with a very good sensitivity and specificity, assessment of BNP after CRT could be used as an additional tool to assist the clinician in the evaluation of the patient's condition [42].

After adjusting for all variables, neither echo parameters (p value was 0.865, 0.495, and 0.380 for EDV, ESV and EF respectively), nor BNP level (p value 0.120) prior to implantation could predict responders. Only QRS width in surface ECG could predict responders (p=<0.01). A cut-off QRS width of 140ms had a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 59.1% in predicting CRT response.

5.2. Practical implications

Our results may have important implications for management decisions in patients receiving CRT. The long term outcome of CRT could be predicted by changes in BNP level earlier after implant of the CRT system (i.e. after three months). This is supported by the fact that patients at high risk of heart failure progression should be followed more closely and receive more aggressive clinical management, including programing of timing intervals and basic heart rate, fine tuning pacing mode [43] and more aggressive therapeutic strategies.

Furthermore, our study may provide an easy yet reliable surrogate marker to define CRT response. Previous studies use different definitions of CRT response varying from functional parameters (such as NYHA class, 6min walking test) to reverse LV Remodeling and/or toward morbidity and mortality [44]. The property of BNP to define the CRT response is related to the fact that the peptide reflects the complex functional and anatomical status of the cardiovascular system as a whole and may therefore be a more sensitive parameter of clinical status.

The study is limited however by the relatively small study group, larger studies are needed to further support these findings.

6. Conclusions

  • BNP monitoring is potentially a good prognostic indicator of LV functional recovery and reverse remodeling after CRT, and can accurately identify echocardiographic responders after CRT. The findings though are limited to this cohort study.


[1] Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL, et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1845-1853.
[2] St John Sutton MG, Plappert T, Abraham WT, et al. Effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy on left ventricular size and function in chronic heart failure. Circulation 2003;107:1985-1990.
[3] Cazeau S, Leclercq C, Lavergne T, et al, Multisite Stimulation in Cardiomyopathies (MUSTIC) Study Investigators. Effects of multisite biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay. N Engl J Med 2001;344:873-880.
[4] Duncan A, Wait D, Gibson D, et al, MUSTIC (Multisite Stimulation in Cardiomyopathies) Trial. Left ventricular remodelling and haemodynamic effects of multisite biventricular pacing in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and activation disturbances in sinus rhythm: sub-study of the MUSTIC (Multisite Stimulation in Cardiomyopathies) trial. Eur Heart J 2003;24:430-441.
[5] Young JB, Abraham WT, Smith AL, et al. Combined cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioversion defibrillation in advanced chronic heart failure: the MIRACLE ICD trial. JAMA 2003;289(20):2685-2694.
[6] Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL, et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002;346(24):1845-1853.
[7] Cazeau S, Leclercq C, Lavergne T, et al. Effects of multisite biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay. N Engl J Med 2001;344(12):873-880.
[8] Reuter S, Garrigue S, Barold SS, et al. Comparison of characteristics in responders versus nonresponders with biventricular pacing for drug-resistant congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 2002;89(3):346-350.
[9] Bax JJ, Van der Wall EE, Schalij MJ. Cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002;347(22):1803-1804, author reply 1803-4.
[10] Penicka M, Bartunek J, De Bruyne B, et al. Improvement of left ventricular function after cardiac resynchronization therapy is predicted by tissue Doppler imaging echocardiography. Circulation 2004;109(8):978-983.
[11] Lecoq G, Leclercq C, Leray E, et al. Clinical and electrocardiographic predictors of a positive response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in advanced heart failure. Eur Heart J 2005;26(11):1094-1100.
[12] Bleeker GB, Kaandorp TA, Lamb HJ, et al. Effect of posterolateral scar tissue on clinical and echocardiographic improvement after cardiac resynchronization therapy. Circulation 2006;113(7):969-976.
[13] Chung ES, Leon AR, Tavazzi L, et al. Results of the predictors of response to CRT (PROSPECT) trial. Circulation 2008;117(20):2608-2616.
[14] Bax JJ, Ansalone G, Breithardt OA, et al. Echocardiographic evaluation of cardiac resynchronization therapy: ready for routine clinical use? A critical appraisal. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44(1):1-9.
[15] Yu CM, Fung WH, Lin H, et al. Predictors of left ventricular reverse remodeling after cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure secondary to idiopathic dilated or ischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 2003;91(6):684-688.
[16] Bax JJ, Marwick TH, Molhoek SG, et al. Left ventricular dyssynchrony predicts benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with end-stage heart failure before pacemaker implantation. Am J Cardiol 2003;92(10):1238-1240.
[17] Doshi RN. Optimizing resynchronization therapy: can we increase the number of true responders? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2005;16(Suppl. 1):S48-S51.
[18] Troughton RW, Frampton CM, Nicholls MG. Biomarker-guided treatment of heart failure: still waiting for a definitive answer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56(25):2101-2104.
[19] Murdoch DR, McDonagh TA, Byrne J, et al. Titration of vasodilator therapy in chronic heart failure according to plasma brain natriuretic peptide concentration: randomized comparison of the hemodynamic and neuroendocrine effects of tailored versus empirical therapy. Am Heart J 1999;138(6 Pt 1):1126-1132.
[20] Kazanegra R, Cheng V, Garcia A, et al. A rapid test for B-type natriuretic peptide correlates with falling wedge pressures in patients treated for decompensated heart failure: a pilot study. J. Card. Fail. 2001;7(1):21-29.
[21] Johnson W, Omland T, Hall C, et al. Neurohormonal activation rapidly decreases after intravenous therapy with diuretics and vasodilators for class IV heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39(10):1623-1629.
[22] Stangl K, Dschietzig T, Richter C, et al. Pulmonary release and coronary and peripheral consumption of big endothelin and endothelin-1 in severe heart failure: acute effects of vasodilator therapy. Circulation 2000;102(10):1132-1138.
[23] Maeda K, Tsutamoto T, Wada A, et al. High levels of plasma brain natriuretic peptide and interleukin-6 after optimized treatment for heart failure are independent risk factors for morbidity and mortality in patients with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36(5):1587-1593.
[24] Gackowski A, Isnard R, Golmard JL, et al. Comparison of echocardiography and plasma B-type natriuretic peptide for monitoring the response to treatment in acute heart failure. Eur Heart J 2004;25(20):1788-1796.
[25] Fruhwald FM, Fahrleitner-Pammer A, Berger R, et al. Early and sustained effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with moderate to severe heart failure and cardiac dyssynchrony. Eur Heart J 2007;28(13):1592-1597.
[26] de Groote P, Dagorn J, Soudan B, et al. B-type natriuretic peptide and peak exercise oxygen consumption provide independent information for risk stratification in patients with stable congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43(9):1584-1589.
[27] Packer M. Proposal for a new clinical end point to evaluate the efficacy of drugs and devices in the treatment of chronic heart failure. J. Card. Fail. 2001;7(2):176-182.
[28] Lellouche N, De Diego C, Cesario DA, et al. Usefulness of preimplantation B-type natriuretic peptide level for predicting response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol 2007;99(2):242-246.
[29] Yu CM, Gorcsan 3rd J, Bleeker GB, et al. Usefulness of tissue Doppler velocity and strain dyssynchrony for predicting left ventricular reverse remodeling response after cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol 2007;100(8):1263-1270.
[30] Bax JJ, Bleeker GB, Marwick TH, et al. Left ventricular dyssynchrony predicts response and prognosis after cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44(9):1834-1840.
[31] Bax JJ, Ansalone G, Breithardt OA, et al. Echocardiographic evaluation of cardiac resynchronization therapy: ready for routine clinical use? A critical appraisal. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1-9.
[32] Bax JJ, Bleeker GB, Marwick TH, et al. Left ventricular dyssynchrony predicts response and prognosis after cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1834-1840.
[33] Saxon LA Marco TD, Blanc JJ, et al. Resynchronization therapy for heart failure: Educational content from the heart rhythm society website.
[34] Burri Haran, Sunthorn Henri, Shah Dipen, Lerch Ren'e. Optimization of device programming for cardiac resynchronization therapy. PACE 2006;29(12):1416-1425.
[35] Stanek B, Frey B, Hulsmann M, et al. Prognostic evaluation of neurohumoral plasma levels before and during beta-blocker therapy in advanced left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38(2):436-442.
[36] Troughton RW, Frampton CM, Yandle TG, et al. Treatment of heart failure guided by plasma aminoterminal brain natriuretic peptide (N-BNP) concentrations. Lancet 2000;355(9210):1126-1130.
[37] Karsten Filzmaier, Sinha Anil M, Breithardt Ole A, et al. Short-term effects of cardiac resynchronization on brain natriuretic peptide release in patients with systolic heart failure and ventricular conduction disturbance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39(s1):111.
[38] Mortada M. Eyman, Atul Bhatia, Andleeb Bangash, et al., Effect of biventricular pacing on plasma B-type natriuretic peptide levels in patients with heart failure. Heart Rhythm 2(5):S101.
[39] Sinha Anil-Martin, Karsten Filzmaier, Ole-Alexander Breithardt, et al., Usefulness of brain natriuretic peptide release as a surrogate marker of the efficacy of long-term cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure. Am J Cardiol 91(6):755-8.
[40] Ghio S, Freemantle N, Scelsi L, et al. Long-term left ventricular reverse remodelling with cardiac resynchronization therapy: results from the CARE-HF trial. Eur J Heart Fail 2009;11(5):480-488.
[41] Sogaard P, Egeblad H, Kim WY, et al. Tissue Doppler imaging predicts improved systolic performance and reversed left ventricular remodeling during long-term cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40(4):723-730.
[42] Yu CM, Bleeker GB, Fung JW, et al. Left ventricular reverse remodeling but not clinical improvement predicts long-term survival after cardiac resynchronization therapy. Circulation 2005;112(11):1580-1586.
[43] Tanabe M, Dohi K, Onishi K, et al. Biventricular pacing worsened dyssynchrony in heart failure patient with right-bundle branch block. Int J Cardiol 2010;138(3):e47-e50.
[44] Auricchio A, Abraham WT. Cardiac resynchronization therapy: current state of the art: cost versus benefit. Circulation 2004;109(3):300-307.

BNP; CRT; Heart failure

© 2016 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.