Image-guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy for patients with heart failure: a meta-analysis

Table 1 Summary of basic characteristics of the studies included in the meta-analysis

First author (year)	Study design (trial name)	CRT intervention	Follow-up time	Patient no.	Age (yrs)	Gender, male (%)	NYHA grade	LVEF (%)	QRS width (ms)
Saba (2013) [43]	RCT (STARTER)	Image-guided	1.8 ± 1.3 yrs	110	66 ± 11	70 %	II/III/IV: 16/64/20^a	26 ± 6	157 ± 27
Saba (2013) [43]	RCT (STARTER)	Standard^b	1.8 ± 1.3 yrs	77	67 ± 13	78 %	II/III/IV: 8/71/21^a	26 ± 7	162 ± 27
Khan (2012) [42]	RCT (TARGET)	Image-guided	2 yrs	110	72 (65–76)	77 %	III/IV: 95/15^c	23 ± 6	157 (148–170)
Khan (2012) [42]	RCT (TARGET)	Standard^b	2 yrs	110	72 (64–80)	80 %	III/IV: 93/17^c	23 ± 7	159 (146–170)
Bai (2011) [44]	Prospective study	Image-guided	6 mths	50	66 ± 11	60 %	III or IV: 3.10 ± 0.30^d	23 ± 7	153 ± 23
Bai (2011) [44]	Prospective study	Standard^b	6 mths	54	64 ± 9	74 %	III or IV: 3.07 ± 0.26^d	26 ± 6	155 ± 29

Abbreviations: CRT cardiac resynchronization therapy, NYHA New York Heart Association, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, RCT randomized control trials, yrs years, mths months, no number
Data are presented as mean ± SD or median (inter-quartile range), unless noted otherwise. ^bStandard procedures means that empiric placement of LV leads was only facilitated by coronary venography, with a preference for a lateral, posterior, or posterolateral region as an implantation site. ^adata are presented as percentage; ^cdata are presented as counts; ^ddata are presented as mean ± SD

ISSN: 1471-2261