Design and rationale for the Stimulation Of the Left Ventricular Endocardium for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in non-responders and previously untreatable patients (SOLVE-CRT) trial

Emerging Technologies for the Smallest Patients

Pediatric and congenital heart disease patients may require cardiac implantable electronic device implantation, inclusive of pacemaker, ICD, and implantable cardiac monitor, for a variety of etiologies. While leads, generators, and monitors have decreased in size over the years, they remain less ideal for the smallest patients. The potential for a miniature pacemaker, fetal micropacemaker, improving leadless technology, and rechargeable devices creates hope that the development of pediatric-focused devices will increase. Further, alternative approaches that avoid the need for a transvenous or surgical approach may add more options to the toolbox for the pediatric and congenital electrophysiologist.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

The Wireless Stimulation Endocardially for CRT (WiSE-CRT) system is a novel technology used to treat patients with dyssynchronous heart failure (HF) by providing leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Observational studies have demonstrated its safety and efficacy profile, however, the treatment cost-effectiveness has not previously been examined.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the WiSE-CRT System was performed using a cohort-based economic model adopting a "proportion in state" structure. In addition to the primary analysis, scenario analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed to test for uncertainty in input parameters. Outcomes were quantified in terms of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) differences.

RESULTS

The primary analysis demonstrated that treatment with the WiSE-CRT system is likely to be cost-effective over a lifetime horizon at a QALY reimbursement threshold of £20 000, with a net monetary benefit (NMB) of £3781 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness declines at time horizons shorter than 10 years. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that average system battery life had the largest impact on potential cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Within the model limitations, these findings support the use of WiSE-CRT in indicated patients from an economic standpoint. However, improving battery technology should be prioritized to maximize cost-effectiveness in times when health services are under significant financial pressures.

Beyond Conventional Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: A Review of Electrophysiological Options in the Management of Chronic Heart Failure

The incidence of heart failure (HF) continues to grow and burden our health care system. Electrophysiological aberrations are common amongst patients with heart failure and can contribute to worsening symptoms and prognosis. Targeting these abnormalities with cardiac and extra-cardiac device therapies and catheter ablation procedures augments cardiac function. Newer technologies aimed to improvement procedural outcomes, address known procedural limitations and target newer anatomical sites have been trialled recently. We review the role and evidence base for conventional cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) and its optimisation, catheter ablation therapies for atrial arrhythmias, cardiac contractility and autonomic modulation therapies.

Treatment of cardiac resynchronization therapy non-responders: current approaches and new frontiers

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has developed into a very effective technology for patients with decreased systolic function and has substantially improved patients' clinical course. However, non-responsiveness to CRT, described as lack of reverse cardiac chamber remodeling, leading to lack to improve symptoms, heart failure hospitalizations or mortality, is common, rather unpredictable, and not fully understood.

AREAS COVERED

This article aims to discuss key factors that are impacting CRT response; from patient selection to LV lead position, to structured follow-up in CRT clinics. Secondly, common causes and interventions for CRT non-responsiveness are discussed. Next, insight is given into technologies representing new and feasible interventions as well as pacing strategies in this group of patients that remain challenging to treat. Finally, an outlook is given into future scientific development.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the progress that has been made, CRT non-response remains a significant and complex problem. Patient management in interdisciplinary teams including heart failure, imaging, and cardiac arrhythmia experts appears critical as complexity is increasing and CRT non-response often is a multifactorial problem. This will allow optimization of medical therapy, the use of new integrated sensor technologies and telemedicine to ultimately optimize outcomes for all patients in need of CRT.

Management of Heart Failure in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasingly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF) and HF is one of the leading causes of hospitalisation, morbidity and mortality in patients with impaired renal function. Currently, there is strong evidence to support the symptomatic and prognostic benefits of β-blockers, renin–angiotensin–aldosterone inhibitors (RAASis), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in patients with HF and CKD stages 1–3. However, ARNIs, RAASis and MRAs are often suboptimally prescribed for patients with CKD owing to concerns about hyperkalaemia and worsening renal function. There is growing evidence for the use of sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors and IV iron therapy in the management of HF in patients with CKD. However, few studies have included patients with CKD stages 4–5 and patients receiving dialysis, limiting the assessment of the safety and efficacy of these therapies in advanced CKD. Interdisciplinary input from HF and renal specialists is required to provide integrated care for the growing number of patients with HF and CKD.

Leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Leadless left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a novel procedure for treatment of patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. Current evidence is limited to observational studies with small patient numbers.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy of leadless LV endocardial pacing.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted through PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Mean differences (MDs) in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline to 6 months postprocedure were combined using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Cochrane Q test, I2, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis. Funnel plots were constructed to detect publication bias.

RESULTS

Five studies with 181 patients were included in the final analysis. Procedural success rate was 90.6%. Clinical response rate was 63%, with mean improvement in NYHA functional class of 0.43 (MD -0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.76 to -0.1; P = .01), with high heterogeneity (P <.001; I2 = 81.1%). There was a mean increase in LVEF of 6.3% (MD 6.3; 95% CI 4.35-8.19; P <.001, with low heterogeneity (P = 0.84; I2 <0.001%). The echocardiographic response rate was 54%. Procedure-related complication and mortality rates were 23.8% and 2.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of leadless LV endocardial pacing for CRT supports its use as a second-line therapy in patients in whom standard CRT is not possible or has been ineffective. Improvements in safety profile will facilitate widespread uptake in the treatment of these patients.

WiSE CRT Is Beneficial for Heart Failure Patients as a Rescue Therapy: Evidence From a Meta-Analysis

Background

Leadless endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing resynchronization therapy is a novel solution for patients with heart failure (HF) in whom conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) failed.

Methods

PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant cohort studies. Clinical outcomes of interest such as ejection fraction (EF), QRS duration (QRSd), and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) were extracted and analyzed.

Results

Five studies involving 175 HF patients for WiSE CRT were included, and patients were followed-up for 6 months. The implanted success rate ranged from 76.5 to 100%. WiSE CRT resulted in significantly narrower QRSd [mean difference (MD): −38.21 ms, 95% confidence interval (CI): −44.36 to −32.07, p &lt; 0.001], improved left ventricular ejection fraction (MD: 6.07%, 95% CI: 4.43 to 7.71, I2 = 0%, p &lt; 0.001), reduced left ventricular end-systolic volume (MD: −23.47 ml, 95% CI: −37.18 to −9.13, p &lt; 0.001), and reduced left ventricular end-diastolic volume (MD: −24.02 ml, 95% CI: −37.01 to −11.03, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Evidence from current studies suggests that leadless endocardial LV pacing resynchronization is effective for HF patients who failed conventional CRT or needed a device upgrade, and it may be an interesting rescue therapy.

OUP accepted manuscript

Electrical disturbances, such as atrial fibrillation (AF), dyssynchrony, tachycardia, and premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), are present in most patients with heart failure (HF). While these disturbances may be the consequence of HF, increasing evidence suggests that they may also cause or aggravate HF. Animal studies show that longer-lasting left bundle branch block, tachycardia, AF, and PVCs lead to functional derangements at the organ, cellular, and molecular level. Conversely, electrical treatment may reverse or mitigate HF. Clinical studies have shown the superiority of atrial and pulmonary vein ablation for rhythm control and AV nodal ablation for rate control in AF patients when compared with medical treatment. Ablation of PVCs can also improve left ventricular function. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established adjunct therapy currently undergoing several interesting innovations. The current guideline recommendations reflect the safety and efficacy of these ablation therapies and CRT, but currently, these therapies are heavily underutilized. This review focuses on the electrical treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We believe that the team of specialists treating an HF patient should incorporate an electrophysiologist in order to achieve a more widespread use of electrical therapies in the management of HFrEF and should also include individual conditions of the patient, such as body size and gender in therapy fine-tuning.

Endocardial left ventricular pacing

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an effective treatment for dyssynchronous heart failure; however, 30–50% of patients fail to improve after implant. Endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing is an alternative therapy for patients who do not respond to conventional CRT or in whom placement of a lead via the coronary sinus is not possible. It enables pacing at a wide variety of sites, without restrictions due to coronary sinus anatomy, and there is evidence of superior electrical resynchronization and hemodynamic response compared with conventional epicardial CRT. In this article, we discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of endocardial LV pacing compared with conventional CRT, review the evidence for the delivery of endocardial LV pacing using both lead-based and leadless systems, and explore possible future directions of this novel technology.

The wireless pacemaker is on again; from electro-stimulation to synchronization

Leadless stimulation of the right ventricle is now a reality, especially in patients with very specific indications and clinical characteristics, even in the absence of randomized studies to support its use. The reduction of device costs and the refinement of atrioventricular synchronization algorithms will sanction its greater diffusion in the future. The possibility of using leadless technology also for resynchronization therapy, on the other hand, is currently a promising option but, pending randomized studies with robust case histories and adequate follow-ups, it should still be considered as a niche therapy, to be limited to centres highly specialized and in patients in whom conventional resynchronization has been impossible or ineffective.

Leadless pacemakers: A review of current data and future directions

Leadless pacemakers (LPs) have revolutionized the field of pacing by miniaturizing pacemakers and rendering them completelty intracardiac, hence reducing complications related to pacemaker pockets and transvenous leads. However, first generation LPs appear to be associated with a higher rate of myocardial perforation as compared to transvenous pacemakers (TV-PPM). Currently, LPs are predominantly designed to pace the right ventricle with no LPs that provide atrial or biventricular pacing. In this article, we review the available data on LPs while advocating for the need for a randomized controlled trial comparing LPs to TV-PPMs. In addition, we review the future directions of leadless devices.

European experience with a first totally leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker system

Aims

Totally leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can be delivered with a combination of Micra and WiSE-CRT systems. We describe the technical feasibility and first insights into the safety and efficacy of this combination in European experience.

Methods and results

Patients enrolled had indication for both Micra and WiSE-CRT systems because of heart failure related to high burden of pacing by a Micra necessitating system upgrade or inability to implant a conventional CRT system because of infectious or anatomical conditions. The endpoints of the study were technical success of WiSE-CRT implantation with right ventricle-synchonized CRT delivery, acute QRS duration reduction, and freedom from procedure-related major adverse events. All eight WiSE-CRT devices were able to detect the Micra pacing output and to be trained to deliver synchronous LV endocardial pacing. Acute QRS reduction following WiSE-CRT implantation was observed in all eight patients (mean QRS 204.38 ± 30.26 vs. 137.5 ± 24.75 mS, P = 0.012). Seven patients reached 6 months of follow-up. At 6 months after WiSE-CRT implantation, there was a significant increase in LV ejection fraction (28.43 ± 8.01% vs. 39.71 ± 11.89%; P = 0.018) but no evidence of LV reverse remodelling or improvement in New York Heart Association class.

Conclusion

The Micra and the WiSE-CRT systems can successfully operate together to deliver total leadless CRT to a patient. Moreover, the WiSE-CRT system provides the only means to upgrade the large population of Micra patients to CRT capability without replacing the Micra. The range of application of this combination could broaden in the future with the upcoming developments of leadless cardiac pacing.

The evolution of cardiac resynchronization therapy and an introduction to conduction system pacing: a conceptual review

In chronic systolic heart failure and conduction system disease, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the only known non-pharmacologic heart failure therapy that improves cardiac function, functional capacity, and survival while decreasing cardiac workload and hospitalization rates. While conventional bi-ventricular pacing has been shown to benefit patients with heart failure and conduction system disease, there are limitations to its therapeutic success, resulting in widely variable clinical response. Limitations of conventional CRT evolve around myocardial scar, fibrosis, and inability to effectively simulate diseased tissue. Studies have shown endocardial stimulation in closer proximity to the specialized conduction system is more effective when compared with epicardial stimulation. Several observational and acute haemodynamic studies have demonstrated improved electrical resynchronization and echocardiographic response with conduction system pacing (CSP). Our objective is to provide a systematic review of the evolution of CRT, and an introduction to CSP as an intriguing, though experimental physiologic alternative to conventional CRT.

Leadless left ventricular stimulation with WiSE-CRT System - Initial experience and results from phase I of SOLVE-CRT Study (nonrandomized, roll-in phase)

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing is a promising method to deliver cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). WiSE-CRT is a wireless LV endocardial pacing system, and delivers ultrasonic energy to an LV electrode.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to present short-term outcomes with the WiSE-CRT system in centers with no prior implanting experience.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from 19 centers where WiSE-CRT systems were implanted during the roll-in phase of the SOLVE-CRT trial. Patients were followed at 1, 3, and 6 months, including transthoracic echo (TTE) at 6 months.

RESULTS

The WiSE-CRT was successfully implanted in all 31 attempted cases, and 30 patients completed the 6-month follow-up. One patient underwent heart transplantation 1 month after implantation, and was excluded. Fourteen (46.7%) patients demonstrated ≥1 NYHA class improvement. TTE data were available in 29 patients. LV ejection fraction, LV end-systolic volume, and LV end-diastolic volume improved from 28.3% ± 6.7% to 33.5% ± 6.9% (P < .001), 134.9 ± 51.3 mL to 111.1 ± 40.3 mL (P = .0004), and 185.4 ± 58.8 mL to 164.9 ± 50.6 mL (P = .0017), respectively. There were 3 (9.7%) device-related type 1 complications: 1 insufficient LV pacing, 1 embolization of an unanchored LV electrode, and 1 skin infection.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated a high success rate of LV endocardial electrode placement in centers with no prior implanting experience. Favorable clinical responses in heart failure symptoms and significant LV reverse remodeling were noted.

Modified design of stimulation of the left ventricular endocardium for cardiac resynchronization therapy in nonresponders, previously untreatable and high-risk upgrade patients (SOLVE-CRT) trial

The WiSE system is a novel, leadless endocardial system that can provide cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients who cannot be treated with a conventional epicardial left ventricular lead. Safety and efficacy were being evaluated in the pivotal, randomized, double-blind SOLVE-CRT Trial (Stimulation of the Left Ventricular Endocardium for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.) The trial was initiated in 2018; however, patient enrollment was significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic necessitating a change in design. This article describes the revised trial and the scientific rationale for the specific changes in the protocol.

Leadless Left Ventricular Endocardial Pacing and Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy is an important intervention to reduce mortality and morbidity, but even in carefully selected patients approximately 30% fail to improve. This has led to alternative pacing approaches to improve patient outcomes. Left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing allows pacing at site-specific locations that enable the operator to avoid myocardial scar and target areas of latest activation. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) provides a more physiological activation pattern and may allow effective cardiac resynchronisation. This article discusses LV endocardial pacing in detail, including the indications, techniques and outcomes. It discusses LBBAP, its potential benefits over His bundle pacing and procedural outcomes. Finally, it concludes with the future role of endocardial pacing and LBBAP in heart failure patients.

Innovations in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are essential for the management of a variety of cardiac conditions, including tachyarrhythmias, bradyarrhythmias, and medically refractory heart failure (HF). Recent advancements in CIED technology have led to innovative solutions that overcome shortcomings associated with traditional devices or address unmet needs. Leadless pacemakers, subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and extravascular ICDs eliminate lead-related complications common with conventional pacemakers or ICDs. Conduction system pacing (His bundle pacing and left bundle branch pacing) is a more physiologic method of pacing and avoids the deleterious consequences associated with long-term right ventricular pacing. For HF-related devices, cardiac contractility modulation is an emerging therapy that bridges a gap for many patients ineligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy and has been shown to improve HF symptoms and decrease hospitalizations and mortality in select patients. Implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitors help guide HF management and reduce hospitalizations. Lastly, new phrenic nerve stimulating devices are being utilized to treat central sleep apnea, a common comorbidity associated with HF. While further long-term studies are still underway for many of these new technologies, it is anticipated that these devices will become indispensable therapeutics in the expanding cardiovascular armamentarium.

Nontransvenous Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Technology-A Review for the Anesthesiologist

There has been a recent shift in bradycardia pacing and defibrillation therapy to leadless pacemakers and extrathoracic cardioverter-defibrillator technology due to complications associated with transvenous devices. These innovations have implications for anesthesia care, as these novel devices have design and functionality features different from transvenous devices. Current perioperative guidelines do not address management of leadless pacemakers and the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, although implantation rates are increasing globally. This article addresses the features and capabilities of nontransvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices, such as the Micra and the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and provides guidance for perioperative management.

Cardiac Electronic Devices: Future Directions and Challenges

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are essential management options for patients with brady- and tachyarrhythmias or heart failure with concomitant optimal pharmacotherapy. Despite increasing technological advances, there are still gaps in the management of CIED patients, eg, the growing number of lead- and pocket-related long-term complications, including cardiac device–related infective endocarditis, requires the greatest care. Likewise, patients with CIEDs should be monitored remotely as a part of a comprehensive, holistic management approach. In addition, novel technologies used in smartwatches may be a convenient tool for long-term atrial fibrillation (AF) screening, especially in high-risk populations. Early detection of AF may reduce the risk of stroke and other AF-related complications. The objective of this review article was to provide an overview of novel technologies in cardiac rhythm–management devices and future challenges related to CIEDs.

Caudocranial transseptal approach for placement of endocardial left ventricular leads

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is associated with improvement in the quality of life, hospitalization rates, and mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and evidence of the right ventricle-left ventricle (RV-LV) desynchrony. Implant failure rates and patient outcomes have improved with the advent of quadripolar leads, yet alternatives to traditional coronary sinus (CS) LV lead placement is sought for in a subset of advanced heart failure patients with difficult CS anatomy, phrenic nerve stimulation or in nonresponders. Endocardial left ventricular pacing (EnLVP) in chronically anticoagulated patients has been reported as an alternative using different approaches, techniques, and tools with acceptable short and long term adverse events. We present a case of successful EnLVP achieved for CRT using standard techniques and commonly available tools in a patient on chronic direct oral anticoagulation with recurrent heart failure admissions who failed traditional epicardial LV pacing.

Leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing in nonresponders to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Endocardial pacing may be beneficial in patients who fail to improve following conventional epicardial cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The potential to pace anywhere inside the left ventricle thus avoiding myocardial scar and targeting the latest activating segments may be particularly important. The WiSE-CRT system (EBR systems, Sunnyvale, CA) reliably produces wireless, endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing. The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether this system improved symptoms or led to LV remodeling in patients who were nonresponders to conventional CRT.

METHOD

An international, multicenter registry of patients who were nonresponders to conventional CRT and underwent implantation with the WiSE-CRT system was collected.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were included; 20 patients underwent successful implantation with confirmation of endocardial biventricular pacing and in 2 patients, there was a failure of electrode capture. Eighteen patients proceeded to 6-month follow-up; endocardial pacing resulted in a significant reduction in QRS duration compared with intrinsic QRS duration (26.6 ± 24.4 ms; P = .002) and improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (4.7 ± 7.9%; P = .021). The mean reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic volume was 8.3 ± 42.3 cm³ (P = .458) and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) was 13.1 ± 44.3 cm³ (P = .271), which were statistically nonsignificant. Overall, 55.6% of patients had improvement in their clinical composite score and 66.7% had a reduction in LVESV ≥15% and/or absolute improvement in LVEF ≥5%.

CONCLUSION

Nonresponders to conventional CRT have few remaining treatment options. We have shown in this high-risk patient group that the WiSE-CRT system results in improvement in their clinical composite scores and leads to LV remodeling.