Repositioning and optimization of left ventricular lead position in nonresponders to cardiac resynchronization therapy is associated with improved ejection fraction, lower NT-proBNP values, and fewer heart failure symptoms

LV cathode position in CRT recipients: How can we benefit from CMR?

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular lead positioning represents a key step in CRT optimization. However, evidence for its guidance based on specific topographical factors and related imaging techniques is sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze reverse remodeling (RR) and clinical events in CRT recipients based on LV cathode (LVC) position relative to latest mechanical activation (LMA) and scar as determined by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center study of 68 consecutive Q-LV-guided CRT-D and CRT-P recipients. Through CMR-based 3D reconstructions overlayed on fluoroscopy images, LVCs were stratified as concordant, adjacent, or discordant to LMA (3 segments with latest and greatest radial strain) and scar (segments with >50% scar transmurality). The primary endpoint of RR (expressed as percentage ESV change) and secondary composite endpoint of HF hospitalizations, LVAD/heart transplant, or cardiovascular death were compared across categories.

RESULTS

LVC proximity to LMA was associated with a progressive increase in RR (percentage ESV change: concordant -47.0 ± 5.9%, adjacent -31.4 ± 3.1%, discordant +0.4 ± 3.7%), while proximity to scar was associated with sharply decreasing RR (concordant +10.7 ± 12.9%, adjacent +0.3 ± 5.3%, discordant -31.3 ± 4.4%, no scar -35.4 ± 4.8%). 4 integrated classes of LVC position demonstrated a significant positive RR gradient the more optimal the category (class I -47.0 ± 5.9%, class II -34.9 ± 2.8%, class III -5.5 ± 4.3%, class IV + 3.4 ± 5.2%). Freedom from composite secondary endpoint of HF hospitalization, LVAD/heart transplant, or cardiovascular death confirmed these trends demonstrating significant differences across both integrated as well as individual LMA and scar categories.

CONCLUSION

Integrated CMR-determined LVC position relative to LMA and scar stratifies response to CRT.

Clinical outcomes and predictors of delayed echocardiographic response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

The clinical outcomes and mechanisms of delayed responses to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) remain unclear. We aimed to investigate the differences in outcomes and gain insight into the mechanisms of early and delayed responses to CRT.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 110 patients who underwent CRT implantation. Positive response to CRT was defined as ≥15% reduction of left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume on echocardiography at 1 year (early phase) and 3 years (delayed phase) after implantation. The latest mechanical activation site (LMAS) of the LV was identified using two-dimensional speckle-tracking radial strain analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight (71%) patients exhibited an early response 1 year after CRT implantation. Of 32 non-responders in the early phase, 12 (38%) demonstrated a delayed response, and 20 (62%) were classified as non-responders after 3 years. During the follow-up time of 10.3 ± 0.5 years, the delayed and early responders had a similar prognosis of mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. In contrast, non-responders had a worse prognosis. Multivariate analysis revealed that a longer duration (months) between initial HF hospitalization and CRT (odds ratio [OR]: 1.126; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.036-1.222; p = .005), non-exact concordance of LV lead location with LMAS (OR: 32.744; 95% CI: 1.101-973.518; p = .044), and pre-QRS duration (OR: 0.901; 95% CI: 0.827-0.981; p = .016) were independent predictors of delayed response to CRT compared with early response.

CONCLUSION

The prognoses were similar regardless of the response time after CRT. A longer history of HF, suboptimal LV lead position, and shorter pre-QRS duration were related to delayed response than early response.

Indications for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Congenital Heart Disease

Heart failure in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) stems from unique causes compared with the elderly. Patients with CHD face structural abnormalities and malformations present from birth, leading to altered cardiac function and potential complications. In contrast, elderly individuals primarily experience heart failure due to age-related changes and underlying cardiovascular conditions. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can benefit patients with CHD, although it presents numerous challenges. The complexities of CHD anatomy and limited access to appropriate venous sites for lead placement make CRT implantation demanding.

Association between left ventricular lead position and intrinsic QRS morphology with regard to clinical outcome in cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular (LV) lead position may be an important factor for delivering effective cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We therefore aimed to evaluate the effects of LV lead position, stratified by native QRS morphology, regarding the clinical outcome.

METHODS

A total of 1295 CRT-implanted patients were retrospectively evaluated. LV lead position was classified as lateral, anterior, inferior, or apical, and was determined using the left and right anterior oblique X-ray views. Kaplan Meier and Cox regression were performed to evaluate the effects on all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization, and the potential interaction between LV lead position and native ECG morphologies.

RESULTS

A total of 1295 patients were included. Patients were aged 69 ± 7 years, 20% were female, 46% received a CRT-Pacemaker (vs. CRT-Defibrillator), mean LVEF was 25% ± 7%, and median follow-up was 3.3 years [IQR 1.6-5-7 years]. Eight hundred and eighty-two patients (68%) had a lateral LV lead location, 207 (16%) anterior, 155 (12%) apical, and 51 (4%) inferior. Patients with lateral LV lead position had larger QRS reduction (-13 ± 27 ms vs. -3 ± 24 ms, p < .001). Non-lateral lead location was associated with a higher risk for all-cause mortality (HR 1.34 [1.09-1.67], p = .007) and heart failure hospitalization (HR 1.25 [1.03-1.52], p = .03). This association was strongest for patients with native left or right bundle branch block, and not significant for patients with prior paced QRS or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with CRT, non-lateral LV lead positions (including apical, anterior, and inferior positions) were associated with worse clinical outcome and less reduction of QRS duration. This association was strongest for patients with native LBBB or RBBB.