Comparison of benefits and mortality in cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation versus patients in sinus rhythm (Results of the Spanish Atrial Fibrillation and Resynchronization [SPARE] Study)

Predictors of Higher Frequency of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background and Objectives: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is one of the effective therapeutic options in the treatment of systolic heart failure (HF) with persistent symptoms. This prospective study was designed to determine whether CRT with biventricular pacing would reduce the risk of development of atrial fibrillation (AF) and to identify predictors for AF occurrence. Materials and Methods: The study population consisted of 126 patients, with a mean age of 63.8 ± 9.1 years, who were eligible for CRT with biventricular pacing. Inclusion criteria were left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%, QRS duration ≥ 130 msec, and persistent HF symptoms of New York Heart Association (NYHA) II or III, despite optimal drug therapy. Patients were followed for a period of 24 months and were evaluated through clinical, electrocardiographic, and echocardiographic examination at baseline (prior to CRT implantation), as well as at 6 and 24 months post-implantation. At the end of follow-up, patients were divided into clinical responders and non-responders based on the following criteria: decrease in NYHA class ≥ I, increase in LVEF ≥ 10%, and reduction in QRS duration ≥ 20 msec. Results: At follow-up, CRT was associated with a significant increase in LVEF (20.6 ± 6.9% pre-implantation, 32.9 ± 9.3% 24 months after implantation; p < 0.001), reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic diameters, and decrease in QRS duration (167.6 ± 14.3 msec pre-implantation, 131.7 ± 11.7 msec 24 months after implantation; p < 0.001), while left atrial (LA) diameter was slightly increased (p = 0.070). The frequency of AF occurrence increased after two years of follow-up (52.4% to 56.9%, p < 0.001). Significant predictors of AF occurrence in our study population were response to CRT-AF more frequent in non-responders (B = 8.134; p < 0.001), LA diameter-AF more frequent with larger LA diameter (B = 0.813; p < 0.001), and coronary sinus (CS) lead position-AF more frequent with posterolateral in comparison with lateral CS lead position (B = 5.159; p = 0.005). Conclusions: The results of our study provide new data on AF predictors in patients with HF subjected to CRT. There remains a permanent need for new predictors, which might help in patient selection and improvement in response rate.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with a prior history of atrial fibrillation: Insights from four major clinical trials

AIMS

To investigate the association of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on outcomes among participants with and without a history of atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

Individual-patient-data from four randomized trials investigating CRT-Defibrillators (COMPANION, MADIT-CRT, REVERSE) or CRT-Pacemakers (COMPANION, MIRACLE) were analyzed. Outcomes were time to a composite of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality or to all-cause mortality alone. The association of CRT on outcomes for patients with and without a history of AF was assessed using a Bayesian-Weibull survival regression model adjusting for baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 3964 patients included, 586 (14.8%) had a history of AF; 2245 (66%) were randomized to CRT. Overall, CRT reduced the risk of the primary composite endpoint (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69, 95% credible interval [CI]: 0.56-0.81). The effect was similar (posterior probability of no interaction = 0.26) in patients with (HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.55-1.10) and without a history of AF (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55-0.80). In these four trials, CRT did not reduce mortality overall (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66-1.01) without evidence of interaction (posterior probability of no interaction = 0.14) for patients with (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.70-1.74) or without a history of AF (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.60-0.97).

CONCLUSION

The association of CRT on the composite endpoint or mortality was not statistically different for patients with or without a history of AF, but this could reflect inadequate power. Our results call for trials to confirm the benefit of CRT recipients with a history of AF.

Fifteen-Year Differences in Indications for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in International Guidelines-Insights from the Heart Failure Registries of the European Society of Cardiology

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) applied to selected patients with heart failure (HF) improves their prognosis. In recent years, eligibility criteria for CRT have regularly changed. This study aimed to investigate the changes in eligibility of real-life HF patients for CRT over the past fifteen years. We reviewed European and North American guidelines from this period and applied them to HF patients from the ESC-HF Pilot and ESC-Long-Term Registries. Taking into consideration the criteria assessed in this study (including all classes of recommendations i.e., class I, IIa and IIb, as well as patients with AF and SR), the 2013 (ESC) guidelines would have qualified the most patients for CRT (266, 18.3%), while the 2015 (ESC) guidelines would have qualified the least (115, 7.9%; p-value for differences between all analyzed papers <0.0001). There were only 26 patients (1.8%) who would be eligible for CRT using the class I recommendations across all of the guidelines. These results demonstrate the variability in recommendations for CRT over the years. Moreover, this data indicates underuse of this form of pacing in HF and highlights the need for more studies in order to improve the outcomes of HF patients and further personalize their management.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Pacemaker and Atrioventricular Junction Ablation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation—A Systematic Review of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) could be considered for heart failure (HF) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) unless a potent ventricular capture strategy is conducted. However, the benefit of a pacemaker (PM; as part of CRT) in patients with AF and whether atrioventricular junction (or nodal) ablation (AVAB) can improve the prognosis of these patients compared with those treated medically to support ventricular capture are unclear.

Methods and Results

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating the roles of PMs and AVAB in patients with AF were obtained in a search of the PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases and then analyzed with respect to the following outcomes: mortality, left ventricular ejection fraction, and clinical findings including the New York Heart Association class, 6-min walk distance (6MWD), quality of life as assessed in a specific questionnaire, and response to CRT. The quality of the included reviews was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 tool, which includes 16 items. This study was finally based on 13 systematic reviews or meta-analyses. The results showed that patients with AF have higher all-cause mortality rates compared with patients with sinus rhythm and that AVAB can reduce all-cause mortality in patients with AF. Although the functional improvement was better in sinus rhythm than in patients with AF, in the latter, AVAB increased the 6MWD and reduced the CRT nonresponse rate in patients with AF.

Conclusion

Atrial fibrillation is associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate in patients with CRT implantation. AVAB, by increasing the 6MWD and survival, can improve the prognosis of these patients.

The Benefit of Atrioventricular Junction Ablation for Permanent Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure Patients Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is correlated with a poor biventricular pacing and inadequate response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Biventricular pacing improvement can be achieved by conducting the atrioventricular junction ablation (AVJA). We aimed to investigate the benefit of AVJA for permanent AF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients receiving CRT.

METHODS

In August 2020, a systematic review and meta-analysis study comparing CRT plus AVJA versus CRT for permanent AF and HFrEF patients was conducted. Relevant articles were identified through the electronic scientific database such as ClinicalTrials.gov, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, PubMed, and Cochrane. The pooled risk ratio (RR) and pooled mean difference (MD) were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 3199 patients from 14 cohort studies were involved in this study. Additional AVJA reduced cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61 to 0.93, P < 0.01) in permanent AF and HFrEF patients receiving CRT. Biventricular pacing rate was higher in CRT plus AVJA group (MD = 8.65%, 95% CI = 5.62 to 11.67, P < 0.01) than in CRT alone group. The reverse remodeling characterized by the reduction of left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was greater in the CRT plus AVJA group (MD = -2.11 mm, 95% CI = -3.79 to -0.42, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In permanent AF and HFrEF patients receiving CRT, AVJA effectively increased the biventricular pacing rate. Adequate biventricular pacing rate provided a better response to the CRT marked by the greater ventricular reverse remodeling and survival from cardiovascular mortality.

Nonpharmacological Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: What Is the Role of Device Therapy?

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia in the adult population, and its incidence and prevalence are still rising. Cardiac devices are widely used in clinical practice in the management of various rhythm disturbances and heart failure treatment. Many patients who receive a pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, or cardiac resynchronization therapy also experience atrial fibrillation in the course of their life. Therefore, this review aims to describe the role of these devices in the treatment and prevention of atrial fibrillation in the device recipients. In addition, all these implantable devices also serve as permanent ECG (electrocardiogram) monitors, thus providing important information about the presence and characteristics of atrial fibrillation that may or may not be detected by the patient but can modify our therapeutical approach with regard to the stroke prevention.

A prognostic nomogram for event-free survival in patients with atrial fibrillation before cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF), one of the most common comorbidities of heart failure (HF), is associated with worse long-term prognosis in HF patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, there is still no convenient tool to identify CRT candidates with AF who are at high risk of mortality and hospitalization due to HF.

Methods

We included 152 consecutive patients with AF for CRT in our hospital from January 2009 to July 2019. Multiple imputation was used for missing values. With imputed datasets, a multivariate Cox regression model was performed for variable selection using the backward stepwise method to predict all-cause mortality and HF readmissions. A nomogram and nomogram-based scoring system were constructed from the selected predictors. Then, internal validation and calibration were achieved by the bootstrap method, deriving the corrected concordance index and calibration curves. Sensitivity analysis was also performed to validate our selected predictors.

Results

Five predictors were incorporated in the nomogram, including N-terminal pro brain natriuretic protein (NT-proBNP) > 1745 pg/mL, history of syncope, previous pulmonary hypertension, moderate or severe tricuspid regurgitation, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) > 4 mIU/L. The concordance index (0.70, 95% CI 0.62–0.77), corrected concordance index (0.67, 95% CI 0.59–0.74) and calibration curve showed optimal discrimination and calibration of the established nomogram. A significant difference in overall event-free survival was recognized by the nomogram-derived scores for patients with high risk (> 50 points), intermediate risk (21–50 points) and low risk (0–20 points) before CRT.

Conclusion

Our internally validated nomogram may be an applicable tool for the early risk stratification of CRT candidates with AF.

Comparison of left ventricular and biventricular pacing: Rationale and clinical implications

Cardiac resynchronization therapy constitutes a cornerstone in advanced heart failure treatment, when there is evidence of dyssynchrony, especially by electrocardiography. However, it is plagued both by persistently high (~30%) rates of nonresponse and by deterioration of right ventricular function, owing to iatrogenic dyssynchrony in the context of persistent apical pacing to ensure delivery of biventricular pacing. Left ventricular pacing has long been considered an alternative to standard biventricular pacing and can be achieved as easily as inserting a single pacing electrode in the coronary sinus. Although monoventricular left ventricular pacing has been proven to yield comparable results with the standard biventricular modality, it is the advent of preferential left ventricular pacing, combining both the powerful resynchronization potential of multipolar coronary sinus and right-sided electrodes acting in concert and the ability to preserve intrinsic, physiological right ventricular activation. In this review, we aim to present the underlying principles and modes for delivering left ventricular pacing, as well as to highlight advantages of preferential over monoventricular configuration. Finally, current clinical evidence, following implementation of automated algorithms, regarding performance of left ventricular as compared with biventricular pacing will be discussed. It is expected that the field of preferential left ventricular pacing will grow significantly over the following years, and its combination with other advanced pacing modalities may promote clinical status and prognosis of patients with advanced dyssynchronous heart failure.

A Post hoc analysis on rhythm and high intensity interval training in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Objectives. Evaluate the effects of a 6-month High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) program on (1) functional capacity and health-related quality of life, (2) multiple blood biomarkers, (3) echocardiographic parameters, and (4) exercise performance, in patients in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) stratified by the presence of atrial fibrillation (AF), targeting the following questions: (1) Does CRT provide similar benefits in patients in AF and sinus rhythm (SR)?; and (2) Does HIIT provides similar benefits in patients in AF and SR? Design. Estimates were available at baseline and 6 months after CRT implantation in 37 patients with heart failure. Patients were randomized after CRT to a 24-week HIIT group or to a usual care group (CON). In this sub-analysis, HIIT (AF = 7; SR = 11) and CON (AF = 9; SR = 10) were stratified by the presence of AF. Results. Patients in AF benefitted to a lesser degree from CRT in functional status than patients in SR (23.8-46.0%). However, HIIT induced superior improvements in patients in AF compared to CON (23.9-61.0%). Decreases in TNF-α (8.5-42.9%), BNP (15.3-34.6%) and left ventricular mass (9.6-26.2%) were only observed in patients in SR, whereas increases in peak oxygen uptake were only observed in patients in AF (19.5-23.2%). HIIT improved exercise capacity (8.8-59.4%) in patients in SR. Conclusions. Patients in AF or SR undergoing CRT demonstrated distinct benefits from device implantation and from HIIT as an adjunctive therapeutic strategy. This suggests that both mainstay and adjunctive therapeutics may need to be managed differently in patients in AF and SR.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Should Be First-Line Therapy in Heart Failure Patients: CON

Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are the epidemics of the twenty-first century. These often coexist and are the cause of major morbidity and mortality. Management of these patients has posed a significant challenge to the medical community. Guideline-directed pharmacologic therapy for heart failure is important; however, there is no clear consensus on how best to treat AF with concomitant HF. In this article, we provide an in-depth review of the management of AF in patients with HF and provide insight as to why catheter ablation should not be the first line of therapy in this population.

Outcomes of cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with heart failure with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) is beneficial in selected patients with heart failure (HF) in normal sinus rhythm (NSR). We sought to evaluate the impact of CRT with or without atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation in patients with HF with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods and results

Literature was searched (inception through 30 August 2017) for observational studies that reported outcomes in patients with HF with CRT and AF that reported all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Thirty-one studies with 83, 571 patients were included. CRT did not decrease mortality compared with internal cardioverter defibrillator or medical therapy alone in patients with HF and AF with indications for CRT (OR: 0.851, 95% CI 0.616 to 1.176, p=0.328, I2=86.954). CRT-AF patients had significantly higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality than CRT-NSR patients ([OR: 1.472, 95% CI 1.301 to 1.664, p=0.000] and [OR: 1.857, 95% CI 1.350 to 2.554, p=0.000] respectively). Change in left ventricular ejection fraction was not different between CRT patients with and without AF (p=0.705). AVJ ablation, however, improved all-cause mortality in CRT-AF patients when compared with CRT-AF patients without AVJ ablation (OR: 0.485, 95% CI 0.247 to 0.952, p=0.035). With AVJ ablation, there was no difference in all-cause mortality in CRT-AF patients compared with CRT-NSR patients (OR: 1.245, 95% CI 0.914 to 1.696, p=0.165).

Conclusion

The results of our meta-analysis suggest that AF was associated with decreased CRT benefits in patients with HF. CRT, however, benefits patients with AF with AVJ ablation.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRTd) in failing heart patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and treated by glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) therapy vs. conventional hypoglycemic drugs: arrhythmic burden, hospitalizations for heart failure, and CRTd responders rate

Objectives

To evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes, treated by cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-d), and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy vs. CRTd patients under conventional hypoglycemic drugs.

Background

Patients with diabetes treated by CRTd experienced an amelioration of functional New York Association Heart class, reduction of hospital admissions, and mortality, in a percentage about 60%. However, about 40% of CRTd patients with diabetes experience a worse prognosis.

Materials and methods

We investigated the 12-months prognosis of CRTd patients with diabetes, previously treated with hypoglycemic drugs therapy (n 271) vs. a matched cohort of CRTd patients with diabetes treated with GLP-1 RA in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy (n 288).

Results

At follow up CRTd patients with diabetes treated by GLP-1 RA therapy vs. CRTd patients with diabetes that did not receive GLP-1 RA therapy, experienced a significant reduction of NYHA class (p value < 0.05), associated to higher values of 6 min walking test (p value < 0.05), and higher rate of CRTd responders (p value < 0.05). GLP-1 RA patients vs. controls at follow up end experienced lower AF events (p value < 0.05), lower VT events (p value < 0.05), lower rate of hospitalization for heart failure worsening (p value < 0.05), and higher rate of CRTd responders (p value < 0.05). To date, GLP-1 RA therapy may predict a reduction of AF events (HR 0.603, CI [0.411–0.884]), VT events (HR 0.964, CI [0.963–0.992]), and hospitalization for heart failure worsening (HR 0.119, CI [0.028–0.508]), and a higher CRT responders rate (HR 3.707, CI [1.226–14.570]).

Conclusions

GLP-1 RA drugs in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy may significantly reduce systemic inflammation and circulating BNP levels in CRTd patients with diabetes, leading to a significant improvement of LVEF and of the 6 min walking test, and to a reduction of the arrhythmic burden. Consequently, GLP-1 RA drugs in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy may reduce hospital admissions for heart failure worsening, by increasing CRTd responders rate.

Trial registration NCT03282136. Registered 9 December 2017 “retrospectively registered”

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: How to Decrease Nonresponders

Nonresponse to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is still a major issue in therapy expansion. The description of fast, simple, cost-effective methods to optimize CRT could help in adapting pacing intervals to individual patients. A better understanding of the importance of appropriate patient selection, left ventricular lead placement, and device programming, together with a multidisciplinary approach and an optimal follow-up of the patients, may reduce the percentage of nonresponders.

Device pacing diagnostics overestimate effective cardiac resynchronization therapy pacing results of the hOLter for Efficacy analysis of CRT (OLÉ CRT) study

BACKGROUND

A high percentage of biventricular (BiV) or left ventricular (LV) pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices has been associated with superior clinical outcomes. However, the percent ventricular (%V) pacing reported by CRT devices simply indicates the number of paces the device has delivered and not the proportion of pacing that has captured the LV effectively.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a beat-by-beat evaluation of effective pacing would provide a more accurate evaluation of CRT delivery.

METHODS

An automatic electrogram (EGM)-based algorithm that classifies each LV pace as effective or ineffective based on detection of QS/QS-r morphology on the unipolar LV EGM during pacing was developed and validated. LV EGMs that were recorded by 24-hour Holter from 57 CRT patients were postprocessed. The percent effective CRT (%e-CRT) pacing was calculated by dividing the time spent in e-CRT pacing by the total time of the recording.

RESULTS

In this CRT cohort, the average %V pacing (94.8% ± 8%) significantly overestimated the %e-CRT pacing (87.5% ± 23%; P <.001). A significant minority of subjects (18%) had a discrepancy of at least 3 percentage points between %V pacing and %e-CRT pacing (mean 39% ± 41%).

CONCLUSION

Current device pacing diagnostics overestimate the amount of CRT pacing actually delivered. The new algorithm quantifies ineffective CRT pacing, which enables clinicians to identify patients with this issue and to address the reasons behind suboptimal CRT delivery.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To combine the results of the best scientific evidence in order to compare the effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and in sinus rhythm (SR) and to determine the effect of atrioventricular nodal ablation in AF patients.

METHODS

The electronic databases PubMed, B-On and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched, and manual searches were performed, for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies up to November 2012. The endpoints analyzed were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and response to CRT.

RESULTS

We included 19 studies involving 5324 patients: 1399 in AF and 3925 in SR. All-cause mortality was more likely in patients with AF compared to patients in SR (OR = 1.69; 95% CI: 1.20–2.37; p = 0.002). There were no statistically significant differences in cardiovascular mortality (OR = 1.36; 95% CI: 0.92–2.01; p = 0.12). AF was associated with an increased likelihood of lack of response to CRT (OR = 1.41; 95% CI: 1.15–1.73; p = 0.001). Among subjects with AF, ablation of the atrioventricular node was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.22–0.80; p = 0.008), cardiovascular death (OR = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.20–0.75; p = 0.005) and the number of non-responders to CRT (OR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.10–0.90; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of AF is associated with increased likelihood of all-cause death and non-response to CRT, compared to patients in SR. However, many patients with AF benefit from CRT. Atrioventricular nodal ablation appears to increase the benefits of CRT in patients with AF.

Cardiac Resynchronization in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in one of four patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).-Without special therapy, the prognosis of AF patients with CRT has been generally worse than those in sinus rhythm. The importance of a high percentage of biventricular pacing (BIV%) was confirmed in a large study where the mortality was inversely associated with BIV% both in the presence of normal sinus and atrial paced rhythm and with AF. The greatest reduction in mortality was observed with BIV% >98%. Patients with BIV% >99.6% experienced a 24% reduction in mortality (p < 0.001) while those with BIV% <94.8% had a 19% increase in mortality. The optimal BIV% cut-point was 98.7%. This cutoff would appear mandatory but it would be best to approach 100%. Careful evaluation of device interrogation data upon which the BiV% is based is essential because the memorized data can vastly overestimate the percentage of truly resynchronized beats since it does not account for fusion and pseudofusion between intrinsic (not paced) and paced beats. The recently published randomized CERTIFY trial provides unequivocal proof of the value of AV junctional (AVJ) ablation in CRT patients with AF. This trial confirmed the favorable results of AVJ ablation by many other studies and two important meta-analyses and therefore established the firm recommendation that the procedure should be performed in most, if not all, patients with permanent AF as well as those with frequent and prolonged episodes of paroxysmal AF. Patients after AVJ have improved mortality with a mortality similar to those in sinus rhythm. The AVJ ablation procedure carries the theoretical risk of device failure and death in pacemaker dependent patients. An inappropriate first ICD shock for AF seems to increase mortality. Increased long-term mortality after an inappropriate shock may be due to the underlying atrial arrhythmia substrate as opposed to the effect of the shock itself.

Atrial Fibrillation During Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

The landmark trials on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) have focused on patients with sinus rhythm at inclusion. Little data are available on the efficacy of CRT in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), while AF has a high prevalence (20-40%) among patients receiving CRT. This review focuses on the detrimental effect of AF on CRT response and discusses management of patients with AF during CRT. Uncertainty remains as to which thresholds of AF burden can lead to a reduced response to CRT and every effort should be made in trying to assess and guarantee successful biventricular pacing in patients with AF.

A review on atrioventricular junction ablation and pacing for heart rate control of atrial fibrillation

Atrioventricular junction ablation with permanent pacemaker implantation is a highly effective treatment approach in patients with atrial fibrillation and high ventricular rates resistant to other treatment modalities, especially in the elderly or those with severe comorbidities. Compared with pharmacological therapy alone, the so-called “ablate and pace” approach offers the potential for more robust control of ventricular rate. Atrioventricular junction ablation and pacing strategy is associated with improvement in symptoms, quality of life, and exercise capacity. Given the close relationship between atrial fibrillation and heart failure, there is a particular benefit of such a rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation and reduced systolic function. There is increasing evidence that cardiac resynchronization therapy devices may be beneficial in selected populations after atrioventricular junction ablation. The present review article focuses on the current recommendations for atrioventricular junction ablation and pacing for heart rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation. The technique, the optimal implantation time, and the proper device selection after atrioventricular junction ablation are also discussed.

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: How to Decrease Nonresponders

Nonresponse to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is still a major issue in therapy expansion. The description of fast, simple, cost-effective methods to optimize CRT could help in adapting pacing intervals to individual patients. A better understanding of the importance of appropriate patient selection, left ventricular lead placement, and device programming, together with a multidisciplinary approach and an optimal follow-up of the patients, may reduce the percentage of nonresponders.

Effects of atrioventricular nodal ablation on permanent atrial fibrillation patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a well-established therapy for patients with heart failure (HF) and wide QRS configuration, especially for those in sinus rhythm. However, for those with permanent AF, atrioventricular nodal (AVN) ablation use remains under debate. Our objective was to evaluate clinical outcomes and mortality of AVN ablation in HF patients with permanent AF receiving CRT. Electronic publication database and reference lists through October 1, 2013 were searched. Observational cohort studies comparing CRT patients with AF who received either AVN ablation or medical therapy were selected. Outcomes included mortality, CRT nonresponse, changes in left ventricular remodeling, and functional outcomes, such as New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, quality of life, and 6-minute hall walk distance. Of 1641 reports identified, 13 studies with 1256 patients were included. Among patients with permanent AF and insufficient biventricular pacing (< 90%), those who had undergone AVN ablation compared to those who did not had numerically lower all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42 to 0.96, P = 0.03) and significantly lower nonresponse to CRT (RR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.54, P < 0.00001). Furthermore, AVN ablation was not associated with additional improvements on left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA functional class, 6-minute hall walking distance, and quality of life. In patients with permanent AF undergoing CRT, AVN ablation tended to reduce mortality potentially and improved clinical response when it was applied to patients with inadequate biventricular pacing (< 90%). Randomized controlled trials are needed to further address the efficacy of AVN ablation among this population.

EAARN score, a predictive score for mortality in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy based on pre-implantation risk factors

AIMS

The beneficial effects of CRT in patients with advanced heart failure, wide QRS, and low LVEF have been clearly established. Nevertheless, mortality remains high in some patients. The aims of our study were to identify the predictors of mortality in patients treated with CRT and to design a risk score for mortality.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A cohort of 608 consecutive patients treated with CRT from 2000 to 2011 in our centre was prospectively analysed. Baseline clinical and echocardiography variables were analysed and mortality data were collected. During a mean follow-up of 36.2 ± 29.2 months, 174 patients died: 123/174 (71%) due to cardiovascular causes, 25/174 (14%) non-cardiac causes, and 26/174 (15%) unknown aetiology. In a multivariate analysis the predictors of mortality were NYHA class IV [hazard ratio (HR) 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7-3.7, P < 0.001], glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.14-2.30, P = 0.008), AF (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.19-2.3, P = 0.01), age ≥70 years (HR 1.44, (95% CI 1.04-2.00, P = 0.02), and LVEF <22% (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.33-2.52, P ≤ 0.001). The EAARN score (EF, Age, AF, Renal dysfunction, NYHA class IV) summarizes the predictors. Each additional predictor increased the mortality: one predictor, HR 3.28 (95% CI 1.37-7.8, P = 0.008); two, HR 5.23 (95% CI 2.24-12.10, P < 0.001); three, HR 9.63 (95% CI 4.1-22.60, P < 0.001); and four or more, HR 14.38 (95% CI 5.8-35.65, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The predictors of mortality have a significant add-on predictive effect on mortality. The EAARN score could be useful to stratify the prognosis of CRT patients.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy mechanisms in atrial fibrillation

This article examines how to assess the reliability of potential techniques for performing optimization of biventricular pacemakers in patients with atrial fibrillation. It explores the magnitude of improvement that is likely to be obtained with the optimization of biventricular pacing in this clinical setting and discusses the lessons that can be learned with regard to the mechanisms of action of biventricular pacing in the general heart failure population.

Continuous monitoring of atrial fibrillation in heart failure

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for heart failure, continuous monitoring of the percentage of biventricular BiV% pacing has shown that the greatest improvement and reduction in mortality occur with a BiV pacing greater than 98%. Continuous monitoring of BiV pacing has improved the CRT management of patients with AF. Continuous monitoring has generated important new questions about anticoagulant therapy, which require randomized trials. Anticoagulant therapy should probably be considered in patients who have a high risk of thromboembolism according to standard scoring systems.

Complete atrioventricular block does not reduce long-term mortality in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

A maximum percentage of ventricular pacing is mandatory to obtain a good response to CRT. Atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation has been recommended to attain this objective in patients with AF.

THE AIMS OF OUR STUDY WERE

(i) to determine whether the presence of complete AVJ block (induced or spontaneous) improves survival in patients with permanent AF treated with CRT and (ii) to analyse the predictors of mortality in AF patients treated with CRT.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From a series of 608 patients treated with CRT in our centre from 2000 to 2011, a cohort of 155 patients with permanent AF was analysed. Patients in AF were divided into two groups, AF + AVJ block [76 (49%)] and AF non-AVJ block [79 (51%)]. Mean follow-up was 30 months (interquartile range 13-51 months). During the follow-up, 62 patients died. Overall and cardiovascular mortality were similar between both groups: hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-1.39, P = 0.51 and HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52-1.68, P = 0.82. Multivariate analysis identified three independent predictors of mortality: basal NYHA functional class IV (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.12-4.22, P = 0.03), glomerular filtration rate (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, P = 0.03), and LVEF (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

AVJ block did not improve survival for patients in AF treated with CRT. Basal NYHA functional class IV, poor renal function, and LVEF were the independent predictors of mortality.

Atlas-based quantification of myocardial motion abnormalities: added-value for understanding the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy

Statistical atlases may help improving the analysis of cardiac wall-motion abnormalities. This study aims at demonstrating the clinical value of such a method to better understand the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We compared an atlas of normal septal motion built using apical four-chamber two-dimensional echocardiographic sequences from healthy volunteers with 88 patients undergoing CRT at baseline and at 12 months follow-up. Abnormal motion was quantified locally using a p value based on a statistical distance to normality. Reduction ≥15% in left ventricle end-systolic volume defined CRT response. Responders showed significantly higher reduction of abnormalities (p ≤ 0.001). Non-responders conserved abnormal septal motion at the end of the isovolumic contraction (IVC). A specific inward-outward motion of the septum during IVC predominated in responders and was corrected at follow-up. The method is of interest to characterize patterns of mechanical dyssynchrony and to study the link between their evolution and CRT response.

Atrioventricular junction ablation and pacemaker implantation for heart failure associated with atrial fibrillation: potential issues and therapies in the setting of acute heart failure syndrome

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia and is especially clinically important in patients with heart failure. Prolonged atrial fibrillation with high ventricular rate response may lead to development or worsening of left ventricular function. If adequate heart rate control cannot be obtained medically, often patients will undergo pacemaker implant and catheter ablation of the atrioventricular junction. This intervention can have profound effects on the course of heart failure. This article reviews the technique, complications, outcome data, and alternatives to this management strategy. The potential role of this therapeutic modality in those hospitalized with acute heart failure syndromes is discussed.

Electrocardiographic versus echocardiographic optimization of the interventricular pacing delay in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

Echocardiographic optimization of the VV interval may improve CRT response, but it is time-consuming and not routinely performed. The aim of this study was to compare the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) when the interventricular pacing (VV) interval was optimized by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) to CRT response when it was optimized following QRS width criteria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study included 156 consecutive CRT patients with severe heart failure and left bundle-branch block configuration. Atrioventricular interval was selected according to a pulsed Doppler assessment, and VV optimization was randomly assigned to echocardiography (ECHO group, n = 78) or electrocardiography (ECG group, n = 78). Optimal VV was defined for the ECHO group as producing the best LV intraventricular synchrony according to TDI displacement curves and for the ECG group as resulting in the narrowest QRS measured from the earliest deflection. At 6-month follow-up, percentage of echocardiographic responders (defined as neither death nor heart transplantation and a LV end-systolic volume reduction >10%) was higher in the ECG optimized group (50.0% vs 67.9%; P = 0.023), whereas clinical response (defined as neither death nor heart transplantation and >10% improvement in the 6-minute walking test) was similar in both groups (71.8% vs 73.1%; P = 0.858).

CONCLUSIONS

VV optimization based on QRS width obtained a higher percentage of responders in terms of LV reverse remodeling compared to the TDI method.

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.

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.