Four-Year Efficacy of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy on Exercise Tolerance and Disease Progression

Incidence and clinical relevance of uncontrolled ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation in heart failure patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

Uncontrolled ventricular rate (VR) during atrial fibrillation (AF) may cause clinical deterioration in heart failure (HF) patients who need continuous biventricular pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We aimed at evaluating the association between AF, uncontrolled VR, and sub-optimal CRT, defined as low biventricular pacing percentage (BIVP%).

METHODS AND RESULTS

All 1404 patients had HF, New York Heart Association (NYHA) ≥II, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, and QRS ≥120 ms, and received an implantable CRT defibrillator (CRT-D). Occurrence of AF, VR during AF and lifetime BIVP% were estimated from device data. Ventricular rate during AF was defined as uncontrolled in patients with mean VR>80 bpm and maximum VR>110 bpm. Over a median follow-up of 18 months, AF was detected in 443 of 1404 patients (32%). In this sub-group of AF patients, VR during AF was uncontrolled in 150 of 443 patients (34%). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.06, P= 0.028], and uncontrolled VR [HR = 1.69 (CI = 1.01-2.83), P= 0.046] were the only independent predictors of clinical outcome, assessed by HF hospitalizations and death. The median lifetime BIVP% was 95% (25-75 percentile range 91-99%). Biventricular pacing percentage was significantly and inversely correlated to VR, decreasing by 7% for each 10 bpm increase in VR. Sub-optimal CRT, defined as BIVP% <95%, was predicted by the occurrence of persistent or permanent AF [odds ratio (OR) = 3.77, CI = 2.44-5.82, P< 0.001], and uncontrolled VR [OR = 2.25, CI = 1.35-3.73, P= 0.002].

CONCLUSION

Uncontrolled VR occurs in one-third of CRT-D patients, who experience AF, and is associated with HF hospitalizations and death and with sub-optimal CRT (lifetime BIVP%<95%).

Outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with versus those without atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether the benefits observed with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are similar in patients with versus those without atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. Furthermore, whether patients with AF receiving CRT should undergo atrioventricular nodal (AVN) ablation remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with and those without AF receiving CRT and to evaluate the influence of AVN ablation on outcomes in patients with AF.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Outcomes included death, CRT nonresponse, and changes in left ventricular (LV) remodeling, quality of life (QoL), and 6-minute hall walk distance (6MWD).

RESULTS

Twenty-three observational studies were included and followed a total of 7,495 CRT recipients, 25.5% with AF, for a mean of 33 months. AF was associated with an increased risk of nonresponse to CRT (34.5% vs 26.7%; pooled relative risk [RR] 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12, 1.55; P = .001)) and all-cause mortality (10.8% vs 7.1% per year, pooled RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.08, 2.09; P = .015). The presence of AF was also associated with less improvement in QoL, 6-minute hall walk distance, and LV end-systolic volume but not LV ejection fraction. Among patients with AF, AVN ablation appeared favorable with a lower risk of clinical nonresponse (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.28, 0.58; P <.001) and a reduced risk of death.

CONCLUSION

The benefits of CRT appear to be attenuated in patients with AF. The presence of AF is associated with an increased risk of clinical nonresponse and death than in patients without AF. AVN ablation may improve CRT outcomes in patients with AF.

Criteria for patient selection in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Since the implementation of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) the prognosis of patients with severe heart failure has been improved owing to a reduction in morbidity and mortality rates, as several multicenter trials have shown. However, several patients treated by CRT still lack improvement or even deteriorate during therapy. In some of them, this might be due to the severity and progression of chronic heart failure. In others, the criteria for the indication of CRT and/or optimized device programming might have not been met. Thus, one important option to improve CRT outcome is to improve CRT patient selection. A lot of publications describing various methods identifying a positive or negative prediction of CRT have been released. In summary, decision making based on all these partly contradictory publications indicate a strong need for guidelines for the use of such expensive therapy. The purpose of this article is to give an overview of CRT and summarize the different methods and the limitations of CRT patient selection parameters. With the focus of the different guidelines, this article tries to give an appropriate overview and aid decision making in CRT patients, including a short view of possible new indications.

Prevalence and predictors of off-label use of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Implantable Cardiac-Defibrillator Registry

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to define the extent and nature of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device usage outside consensus guidelines using national data.

BACKGROUND

Recent literature has shown that the application of CRT in clinical practice frequently does not adhere to evidence-based consensus guidelines. Factors underlying these practices have not been fully explored.

METHODS

From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's Implantable Cardiac-Defibrillator Registry, we defined a cohort of 45,392 cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) implants between January 2006 and June 2008 with a primary prevention indication. We defined "off-label" implants as those in which the ejection fraction was >35%, the New York Heart Association functional class was below III, or the QRS interval duration was <120 ms in the absence of a documented need for ventricular pacing. The relationships between patient, implanting physician, and hospital characteristics with off-label use were explored with multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Overall, 23.7% of devices were placed without meeting all 3 implant criteria, most often due to New York Heart Association functional class below III (13.1% of implants) or QRS interval duration <120 ms (12.0%). Atrial fibrillation/flutter, previous percutaneous coronary intervention, and the performance of an electrophysiology study before implant were independently associated with increased odds of off-label use, whereas diabetes mellitus, increasing age, and female sex were associated with decreased odds. Physician training and insurance payer were weakly associated with the likelihood of off-label use.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 1 in 4 patients receiving CRT devices in the study time frame did not meet guideline-based indications. Given the evolving evidence base supporting the use of CRT, these practices require careful scrutiny.

Morbidity and mortality in heart failure patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy: influence of pre-implantation characteristics on long-term outcome

AIMS

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves cardiac function, heart failure symptoms, and prognosis in selected patients. Many baseline characteristics associated with heart failure may influence prognosis after CRT. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of several baseline characteristics in relation to long-term prognosis in heart failure patients treated with CRT.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 716 consecutive heart failure patients treated with CRT were included in an observational registry. All available data, including clinical and echocardiographic measurements, were analysed in relation to two endpoints: all-cause mortality and a combined endpoint of all-cause mortality or major cardiovascular event. Outcome data were collected by chart review, device interrogation, and telephone contact. Mean follow-up was 25 ± 19 months. During follow-up, 141 patients (20%) died (primary endpoint). Most of these patients (61%) died due to worsening heart failure. A total of 214 patients (30%) reached the secondary endpoint. Larger left ventricular end-systolic volume, less distance covered in the 6 min walking test, poor renal function, more severe heart failure, male gender, presence of atrial fibrillation, no posterolateral left ventricular (LV) lead, and no LV dyssynchrony were associated with poor prognosis after CRT.

CONCLUSION

In this large single-centre registry, several baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were associated with prognosis after CRT. Worsening heart failure was the main cause of death in heart failure patients treated with CRT.

[Pacemaker ECG quiz no. 22. A CRT non-responder with atrial fibrillation]

A patient with heart failure functional class NYHA III and permanent atrial fibrillation received a system for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Unfortunately, he reports at a follow-up visit about a completely unchanged poor exercise capacity with dyspnea during exercise at a very low level. The ECG reveals an unusual mode of stimulation.

BIVentricular versus right ventricular antitachycardia pacing to terminate ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy: the ADVANCE CRT-D Trial

BACKGROUND

This multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel trial compares the efficacy of biventricular (BIV) versus right ventricular (RV) antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in terminating all kinds of ventricular tachycardia (VT).

METHODS

Five hundred twenty-six patients implanted with a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) device were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to either BIV (266) or RV (260) ATP (single burst 8 pulse, 88% coupling interval) and were followed up for 12 months.

RESULTS

During 12 months' follow-up, 1,077 ventricular episodes in 180 patients were detected and classified: 634 true VTs divided into 69 ventricular fibrillation (VF) (11%), 202 fast ventricular tachycardia (FVT) (32%), and 363 VT (57%). A comparable first ATP efficacy (BIV 65% vs RV 68%, P = .59) was observed in FVT + VT, in VT zone (BIV 62% vs RV 71%, P = .25), and in FVT zone (BIV 71% vs RV 61%, P = .34). A trend toward lower accelerations during ATP applied to FVT was observed in the BIV group (3.5% BIV vs 10.2% RV, P = .163). No syncope/presyncope occurred during ATP for FVT in the BIV group versus 4 events (3.2%) in the RV group (P = .016). biventricular ATP was more effective in treating FVT in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (P = .032), whereas both modalities presented similar efficacy in patients with non-CAD etiology (P = .549).

CONCLUSIONS

Antitachycardia pacing is effective in patients implanted with a CRT-D device. No significant differences in efficacy emerged between BIV- and RV-delivered ATP in the general population, whereas BIV ATP seems to present a safer profile in ischemic patients.

Value of tissue Doppler echocardiography in predicting response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure

Several studies have demonstrated a relation between left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Many methods of determining LV dyssynchrony have been proposed, including a value of 65 ms as assessed by tissue Doppler imaging. The aim of the present validation study was to prospectively test the predictive accuracy of the 65-ms cutoff for LV dyssynchrony in a large cohort of patients with heart failure undergoing CRT. The study included 361 patients who had undergone CRT. The clinical and echocardiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and at 6 months of follow-up. The clinical response was defined as an improvement of > or = 1 New York Heart Association class, and the echocardiographic response was defined as a reduction in LV end-systolic volume of > or = 15%. At 6 months of follow-up, 259 patients (72%) had a clinical response and 187 patients (52%) had an echocardiographic response. The patients with a response had more LV dyssynchrony than did those without a response (91 + or - 49 ms vs 50 + or - 44 ms for the clinical response and 101 + or - 46 ms vs 55 + or - 45 ms for the echocardiographic response). On multivariate analysis, LV dyssynchrony remained predictive of the response, independent of other characteristics. In conclusion, LV dyssynchrony of > or = 65 ms was an independent predictor of both the clinical and the echocardiographic response in patients with heart failure who underwent CRT in this validation study.

Atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure

Atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure are morbid conditions that have common risk factors and frequently coexist. Each condition predisposes to the other, and the concomitant presence of the two identifies individuals at increased risk for mortality. Recent data have emerged that help elucidate the complex genetic and nongenetic pathophysiological mechanisms that contribute to the development of atrial fibrillation in individuals with congestive heart failure. Clinical trial results offer insights into the noninvasive prevention and management of these conditions, although newer technologies, such as catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation, have yet to be studied extensively in patients with congestive heart failure.

Incidence of paroxysmal atrial tachycardias in patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy and continuously monitored by device diagnostics

AIMS

Little is known about the incidence of paroxysmal atrial tachycardias (PAT) in patients with heart failure (HF). The availability of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices with extended diagnostics for AT enables continuous monitoring of PAT episodes. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence over time of PAT in HF patients treated with CRT.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients in NYHA functional class III or IV despite optimal drug therapy, QRS duration > or = 130 ms, left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 35%, and left ventricular end-diastolic dimension > or = 55 mm were eligible for enrolment. Patients with permanent or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) were not included in the study. The first follow-up examination was performed 2 weeks after implantation, to optimize atrial sensing and CRT. Subsequent follow-up examinations were carried out 15 and 28 weeks after implantation, to collect the telemetric data. A total of 173 patients (67 +/- 11 years, M 116) were enrolled. Complete arrhythmia monitoring data were available from 120 patients over a mean follow-up of 183 +/- 23 days. Atrial tachycardia episodes were detected through telemetry in 25 of 120 patients (21%) during at least one follow-up examination. Atrial tachycardia episodes were recorded in 29 and 17% (P = NS) of patients with and without previous history of AF, respectively.

CONCLUSION

More than 20% of the overall HF patient population treated with CRT suffer PAT episodes. Paroxysmal atrial tachycardia may interfere with response to CRT. Therefore, telemetric data may be relevant to drive the appropriate therapy in each patient.

Atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are common and interrelated conditions, each promoting the other, and both associated with increased mortality. HF leads to structural and electrical atrial remodeling, thus creating the basis for the development and perpetuation of AF; and AF may lead to hemodynamic deterioration and the development of tachycardia-mediated cardiomyopathy. Stroke prevention by antithrombotic therapy is crucial in patients with AF and HF. Of the 2 principal therapeutic strategies to treat AF, rate control and rhythm control, neither has been shown to be superior to the other in terms of survival, despite better survival in patients with sinus rhythm compared with those in AF. Antiarrhythmic drug toxicity and poor efficacy are concerns. Catheter ablation of AF can establish sinus rhythm without the risks of antiarrhythmic drug therapy, but has important procedural risks, and data from randomized trials showing a survival benefit of this treatment strategy are still lacking. In intractable cases, ablation of the atrioventricular junction and placement of a permanent pacemaker is a treatment alternative; and biventricular pacing may prevent or reduce the negative consequences of chronic right ventricular pacing.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important device-based, non-pharmacological approach that has shown, in large randomized trials, to improve left ventricular (LV) function and reduce both morbidity and mortality rates in selected patients affected by advanced heart failure (HF): New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III–IV, reduced LV systolic function with an ejection fraction (EF) ≤35%, QRS duration ≥120 ms, on optimal medical therapy, and who were in sinus rhythm. For the first time, the latest ESC and AHA/ACC/HRS Guidelines have considered atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, who constitute an important subgroup of HF patients, as eligible to receive CRT. Nevertheless, these Guidelines did not include a strategy for defining differentiated approaches according to AF duration or burden. In this review, the authors explain in which way AF may interfere with adequate CRT delivery, how to manage different AF burden, and finally present a brief overview on the effects of CRT in AF patients.

Prediction of appropriate defibrillator therapy in heart failure patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy

The necessity of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) who undergo cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) may be questioned. The aim of this study was to identify patients at low risk for sustained ventricular arrhythmia. One hundred sixty-nine consecutive patients with HF (mean age 60 +/- 12 years, 125 men, 73% in New York Heart Association class III) referred for CRT and prophylactic, primary prevention ICD implantation underwent baseline clinical and echocardiographic assessment and regular device follow-up. The primary study end point was appropriate ICD therapy. During a mean follow-up period of 654 +/- 394 days, 35 patients (21%) had sustained ventricular arrhythmias requiring appropriate ICD therapy. Of the 3 patients who experienced sudden cardiac death, 2 had been treated with appropriate ICD therapy before sudden cardiac death. In a multivariate model, only history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (p = 0.001), a severely (<20%) decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (p = 0.001), and digitalis therapy (p = 0.08) independently predicted appropriate ICD therapy. Patients with 0 (n = 46), 1 (n = 36), 2 (n = 73), and 3 (n = 14) risk factors for appropriate ICD therapy had a 7%, 14%, 27%, and 64% and 0%, 6%, 10%, and 43% incidence of appropriate ICD therapy for ventricular arrhythmias and for rapid ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, respectively. In conclusion, apart from commonsense considerations (age and significant co-morbidities), ICD addition seems ineffective in CRT patients without nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, digoxin therapy, and severely reduced left ventricular systolic function.

Problems and troubleshooting in regular follow-up of patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy

Biventricular pacing is an efficient treatment to improve symptoms and clinical outcome in patients with drug-refractory heart failure, low left ventricular ejection fraction and wide QRS. The basis of the treatment is the permanent delivery of biventricular pacing. During the follow-up of biventricular devices the assessment of permanent biventricular capture is fundamental. This requires a tailored programming with respect to the patient's activity and age, and thus also careful evaluations during an exercise test as well as adequate programming in case of cardiac arrhythmias.

[Indication for CRT]

Since the first studies on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), the evidence for the benefit of this electrical therapy in heart failure has continuously grown. Thus, CRT has been firmly implemented in current therapy guidelines for heart failure. However, there are distinct differences between the different guidelines published. In addition, indications for CRT are still evolving in certain patient groups. This article aims to give an overview of the current guidelines for CRT and also discusses some of the differences between the different guidelines. It also provides an outlook for potential candidates for CRT in the future where current guidelines do not yet define a clear indication for implantation of such a device.

Pacing features that mimic malfunction: a review of current programmable and automated device functions that cause confusion in the clinical setting

Modern implantable devices capable of pacing are armed with a multitude of programmable and automated features. While some features represent important advances in device safety and performance, many can also mimic device malfunction. This article discusses these features in terms of the confusion they may cause and highlights important clinical clues that aid in their recognition.

Effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure patients with valvular heart disease: comparison with patients affected by ischaemic heart disease or dilated cardiomyopathy. The InSync/InSync ICD Italian Registry

Aims

To analyse the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with valvular heart disease (a subset not specifically investigated in randomized controlled trials) in comparison with ischaemic heart disease or dilated cardiomyopathy patients.

Methods and results

Patients enrolled in a national registry were evaluated during a median follow-up of 16 months after CRT implant. Patients with valvular heart disease treated with CRT (n = 108) in comparison with ischaemic heart disease (n = 737) and dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 635) patients presented: (i) a higher prevalence of chronic atrial fibrillation, with atrioventricular node ablation performed in around half of the cases; (ii) a similar clinical and echocardiographic profile at baseline; (iii) a similar improvement of LVEF and a similar reduction in ventricular volumes at 6–12 months; (iv) a favourable clinical response at 12 months with an improvement of the clinical composite score similar to that occurring in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and more pronounced than that observed in patients with ischaemic heart disease; (v) a long-term outcome, in term of freedom from death or heart transplantation, similar to patients affected by ischaemic heart disease and basically more severe than that of patients affected by dilated cardiomyopathy.

Conclusion

In ‘real world’ clinical practice, CRT appears to be effective also in patients with valvular heart disease. However, in this group of patients the outcome after CRT does not precisely overlap any of the two other groups of patients, for which much more data are currently available.

Atrial fibrillation in heart failure: current treatment of patients with remodeled atria

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic heart failure (CHF) can be caused by each other, and therefore constitute a vicious circle. The prevalence of both conditions is about 1% in industrialized countries and increases with age. Although mortality is increased in heart failure, the additional prognostic relevance of AF in these patients is less clear. AF in patients with CHF can worsen heart failure symptoms, cause complications (eg, stroke), and is difficult to treat. Thus, prevention of AF entirely is an important goal. This review summarizes recent data concerning prognostic relevance, treatment, and means of primary and secondary prevention of AF in patients with CHF.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with implantable defibrillators

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients who have implantable defibrillators and presents some unique challenges and opportunities. AF burden can be assessed more accurately, allowing for evaluation of therapy efficacy (drugs or ablation). It remains to be shown whether home monitoring of defibrillators to detect and treat AF more quickly can reduce cardiovascular and stroke end points. One major goal will be to reduce inappropriate shocks from atrial fibrillation. Otherwise, the goals of therapy remain the same-reduction of symptoms (including heart failure exacerbation and inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapies) by controlling rate or rhythm and anticoagulation for stroke prophylaxis.

Atrial fibrillation in congestive heart failure: current management

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and congestive heart failure are common conditions and each predisposes to the development of the other. Basic research using animal models of the two conditions continues to yield insights that may improve therapies. The role of medical therapies aimed at the underlying structural changes in AF continues to be a subject of ongoing studies. Cardiac resynchronization therapy is effective in appropriately selected patients with both sinus rhythm and AF. Catheter ablation is emerging as a potential alternative to antiarrhythmic drug therapy, but large randomized trials will be needed to assess its role.

[CRT in atrial fibrillation--methodical and apparatus options in decision-making]

Heart failure and atrial fibrillation often coexist, especially with increasing degree of heart failure severity. Under this constellation, the advantage of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is still under discussion and displayed as an unresolved problem in the guidelines for cardiac stimulation and resynchronization. If ventricular desynchronization can be documented and response to CRT can be expected, the challenge is to interoperatively seek the best left ventricular electrode position and to postoperatively optimize the device in order to achieve the best therapy performance. This situation encourages the development of individualized methods and to utilize innovative apparatus features in order to consolidate individual decisions and to optimize CRT in heart failure with atrial fibrillation.