The Utility of 12-Lead Holter Monitoring in Patients With Permanent Atrial Fibrillation for the Identification of Nonresponders After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Ineffective cardiac resynchronization pacing is associated with poor outcomes in a nationwide cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Delivery of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) requires left ventricular myocardial capture to achieve clinical benefits.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether ineffective pacing affects survival.

METHODS

Ineffective ventricular pacing (VP) was defined as the difference between the percentage of delivered CRT (%VP) and the percentage of effective CRT in CRT devices. Using the Optum de-identified electronic health record data set and Medtronic CareLink data warehouse, we identified patients implanted with applicable devices with at least 30 days of follow-up. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models assessed the impact of %VP and % ineffective VP on survival.

RESULTS

Among 7987 patients with 2.1 ± 1.0 years of follow-up, increasing ineffective VP was associated with decreasing survival: the highest observed survival was in the quartile with <0.08% ineffective VP and the lowest survival was in the quartile with >1.47% ineffective VP (85.1% vs 75.7% at 3 years; P < .001). As expected, patients with more than the median %VP of 97.7% had better survival than did patients with <97.7% VP (84.2% vs 77.8%; P < .001). However, patients who had >97.7% VP but >2% ineffective VP had similar survival to patients with <97.7% VP but ≤2% ineffective VP (81.6% vs 79.4%; P = .54). A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that <97.7% VP (adjusted hazard ratio 1.29; 95% confidence interval 1.14-1.46; P < .001) and >2% ineffective VP (hazard ratio 1.35; 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.54; P < .001) were both significantly associated with decreased survival.

CONCLUSION

Ineffective VP is associated with decreased survival. In addition to maximizing the percentage of delivered CRT pacing, every effort should be made to minimize ineffective VP.

Twelve-lead ambulatory ECG recording using a seven-electrode recorder: An alternative method for electrophysiological evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Conventional three-lead ambulatory electrocardiogram recording (3L-AECG) is used for the quantitative diagnosis of arrhythmias. However, the lack of crucial information, such as QRS morphology and orientation, renders the 3L-AECG incomplete for planning electrophysiological interventions. The 12-lead AECG (12L-AECG) merges the temporal resolution 3L-AECG with the spatial resolution of the standard electrocardiogram (S-ECG). Although it provides more detail, it is not widely used. This study aimed to verify whether the seven-electrode 12L-AECG and S-ECG have similar waveforms.

METHODS

A questionnaire consisting of 240 side-by-side comparisons (12 leads from 20 patients) was created. These consisted of a QRS registered using the 12L-AECG and a QRS from the same patient, registered using the S-ECG. The questionnaire was submitted to cardiologists trained in electrophysiology. For each comparison, the evaluator assigned "similar" or "different" depending on their own judgment.

RESULTS

Five cardiologists completed the questionnaire, resulting in 1200 answers. The AECG-12 was similar to the ECG in 84.50 % of the instances (95 % confidence interval [CI] 83.20-86.50). The interobserver agreement was moderate (0.542, p < 0.001). The similarity between specific leads ranged up to 98 % (95 % CI 92.96-99.76). No significant differences were found among patients (p = 0.407).

CONCLUSION

The seven-electrode 12L-AECG and S-ECG produced comparable waveforms. This similarity supports the use of 12L-AECG for accurate arrhythmia tracking and assists in planning electrophysiological procedures.

Rhythm and rate control strategies in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation treated with cardiac resynchronization: the results of the randomized Pilot-CRAfT study

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients. It is a marker of impaired CRT response mainly mediated by the reduction of effectively captured biventricular paced beats (BiVp). There are no randomized trials comparing strategies to maintain high BiVp percentage.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of rhythm vs rate control strategies in CRT recipients with long-standing persistent AF.

METHODS

We performed a randomized trial including CRT recipients with persistent AF resulting in low BiVp%. All patients received amiodarone, the rhythm control group received external electrical cardioversion (EC), and the rate control group received atrioventricular node ablation, if needed. The primary end-point was 12-month BiVp% (NCT).

RESULTS

43 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 68.4 (SD: ± 8.3) years and the mean BiVp% 82.4% ± 9.7%. AF lasted 25 ± 19 months. The mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left atrium area, and the maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) were: 30 ± 8%, 33 ± 7 cm2, and 14 ± 5 mL/(kg*min), respectively. The EC success rate was 58%. 38% patients remained in sinus rhythm (SR) after 12 months. BiVp% increased similarly in both arms reaching 99% [95% CI 97.3-99.8] and 98% [94.0-99.0], P = 0.14 in rhythm and rate control groups, respectively. LVEF raised significantly only in the rhythm control group (ΔLVEF 4.1 (± 7.3), P = 0,018) which was driven by the patients who maintained SR. No differences in VO2max, QoL, clinical and safety end-points were observed.

CONCLUSION

Despite comparable BiVp% in both groups, only restoration of SR led to improved left ventricular ejection fraction in CRT patients with long-standing AF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01850277 registered on 22/04/2013.

Evolving Concepts in Cardiac Physiologic Pacing in the Era of Conduction System Pacing

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP) has become a well-established therapy for patients with cardiomyopathy (left ventricular ejection fraction <35%) in the presence of a left bundle branch block. In addition, CPP can be highly beneficial in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and patients with existing cardiomyopathy expected to have a right ventricular pacing burden of >40%. The benefits of CPP with traditional biventricular pacing are only realized if adequate resynchronization can be achieved. However, left ventricular lead implantation can be limited by individual anatomic variation within the coronary venous system and can be adversely affected by underlying abnormal myocardial substrate (i.e., scar tissue), especially if located within the basal lateral wall. In the last 7 years the investigation of conduction system pacing (CSP) and its potential salutary benefits are being realized and have led to a rapid evolution in the field of cardiac resynchronization pacing. However, supportive evidence for CSP for patients eligible for cardiac resynchronization remains limited compared with data available for biventricular cardiac resynchronization, mostly derived from leading CSP investigative centers. In this review, we perform an up-to-date comprehensive review of the available literature on CPP.

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.

Significance of effective cardiac resynchronization therapy pacing for clinical responses: An analysis based on the effective cardiac resynchronization therapy algorithm

BACKGROUND

High percent ventricular pacing maximizes cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response. An effective CRT algorithm classifies each left ventricular (LV) pace as effective or ineffective on the basis of the detection of QS or QS-r morphology on the electrogram; however, the relationship between percent effective CRT pacing (%e-CRT) and responses is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to clarify the association between %e-CRT and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Of the 136 consecutive CRT patients, 49 using the adaptive and effective CRT algorithm with percent ventricular pacing > 90% were evaluated. The primary and secondary outcomes were heart failure (HF) hospitalization and prevalence of CRT responders, defined as patients with an improvement in LV ejection fraction of ≥10% or a reduction in LV end-systolic volume of ≥15% after CRT device implantation, respectively.

RESULTS

We divided the patients into the effective group (n = 25) and the less effective group (n = 24) by the median value of %e-CRT (97.4% [93.7%-98.3%]). During the median follow-up period of 507 days (interquartile range 335-730 days), the effective group had a significantly lower risk of HF hospitalization than the less effective group as revealed by Kaplan-Meier analysis (log-rank, P = .016). Univariate analysis revealed %e-CRT ≥ 97.4% (hazard ratio 0.12; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.95; P = .045) as a predictor of HF hospitalization. The effective group had a higher prevalence of CRT responders than the less effective group (23 [92%] vs 9 [38%]; P < .001). Univariate analysis revealed that %e-CRT ≥ 97.4% (odds ratio 19.20; 95% confidence interval 3.63-101.00; P < .001) was a predictor of CRT response.

CONCLUSION

High %e-CRT is associated with high CRT responder prevalence and low HF hospitalization risk.

Managing arrhythmia in cardiac resynchronisation therapy

Arrhythmia is an extremely common finding in patients receiving cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT). Despite this, in the majority of randomised trials testing CRT efficacy, patients with a recent history of arrhythmia were excluded. Most of our knowledge into the management of arrhythmia in CRT is therefore based on arrhythmia trials in the heart failure (HF) population, rather than from trials dedicated to the CRT population. However, unique to CRT patients is the aim to reach as close to 100% biventricular pacing (BVP) as possible, with HF outcomes greatly influenced by relatively small changes in pacing percentage. Thus, in comparison to the average HF patient, there is an even greater incentive for controlling arrhythmia, to achieve minimal interference with the effective delivery of BVP. In this review, we examine both atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, addressing their impact on CRT, and discuss the available evidence regarding optimal arrhythmia management in this patient group. We review pharmacological and procedural-based approaches, and lastly explore novel ways of harnessing device data to guide treatment of arrhythmia in CRT.

HOT CRT-The Effective Combination of Conventional Cardiac Resynchronization and His Bundle Pacing

Background and Objectives: Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) has, besides its benefits, various limitations. For instance, atrial fibrillation (AF) has a huge impact on the therapy efficacy. It usually reduces the overall BiV pacing percentage and leads, inevitably, to lack of fusion beats. In many patients with heart failure that could benefit from resynchronization, the QRS morphology is often IVCD and atypical, or non-LBBB, which further diminishes the CRT response. In those cases, we established His pacing combined with LV pacing as a feasible option to reduce the impact of AF on the CRT response and regain partially physiological ventricular activation to improve the electromechanical sequence. Materials and Methods: We implanted two patients with AF, HF, EF < 35%, NYHA II-III and QRS > 150 ms with CRT-D systems modified to HOT-CRT and observed their clinical, ECG and echocardiographic improvements over a follow-up period of three months. Results: In both patients we observed improvements of the initial parameters. We were able to shorten the QRS duration to approx. 120 ms, improve NYHA functional class, increase the EF by approximately 12% and distinctly reduce mitral regurgitation. Conclusion: Since the conventional CRT reaches its limits within this specific patient group, we need to consider alternative pacing sites and the effective combination of them. Our results and respectively other studies that are also mentioned in the current guidelines, support the feasibility of HOT-CRT in the above mentioned patient group.

Acute echocardiographic and electrocardiographic effects of triggered left ventricular pacing

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an essential pillar in the therapy of heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) presenting with broad left bundle branch block (LBBB) or pacemaker dependency. To achieve beneficial effects, CRT requires high bi-ventricular (BiV) pacing rates. Therefore, device-manufacturers designed pacing algorithms which maintain high BiV pacing rates by a left ventricular (LV) pacing stimulus immediately following a right ventricular sensed beat. However, data on clinical impact of these algorithms are sparse. We studied 17 patients implanted with a CRT device providing triggered left ventricular pacing (tLVp) in case of atrioventricular nodal conduction. Assessment of LV dyssynchrony was performed using echocardiographic and electrocardiographic examination while CRT-devices were set to three different settings: 1. Optimized bi-ventricular-stimulation (BiV); 2. Physiological AV nodal conduction (tLVp-off); 3. Physiological AV nodal conduction and tLVp-algorithm turned on (tLVp-on). QRS duration increased when the CRT-device was set to tLVp-off compared to BiV-Stim, while QRS duration was comparable to BiV-Stim with the tLVp-on setting. Echocardiographic analysis revealed higher dyssynchrony during tLVp-off compared to BiV-Stim. TLVp-on did not improve LV dyssynchrony compared to tLVp-off. QRS duration significantly decreased using tLVp-algorithms compared to physiological AV nodal conduction. However, echocardiographic examination could not show functional benefit from tLVp-algorithms, suggesting that these algorithms are inferior to regular biventricular pacing regarding cardiac resynchronization. Therefore, medical treatment and ablation procedures should be preferred, when biventricular pacing rates have to be increased. TLVp-algorithms can be used in addition to these treatment options.

Rate or Rhythm Control in CRT (RHYTHMIC): Study rationale and protocol

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) has several detrimental effects on heart failure patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). These include suboptimal biventricular pacing and the loss of atrioventricular (AV) synchrony. AV node ablation improves biventricular pacing and clinical outcomes in large observational studies. However, restoration of sinus rhythm with AF ablation may have additional benefits.

Objectives

To compare the effects of AV node ablation and AF ablation on echocardiographic and symptomatic outcomes in patients with CRT and suboptimal biventricular pacing.

Methods

RHYTHMIC is a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial. Seventy patients will be recruited and randomized to each ablation strategy in a 1:1 ratio. Key inclusion criteria include a previous CRT implant (with atrial lead) for dyssynchronous heart failure, and biventricular pacing <95% secondary to AF. Patients with permanent AF will be excluded.

Results

Patients will undergo baseline assessment including transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), device check, blood tests, electrocardiogram (ECG), 6-minute walk test, and symptom questionnaire. They will then undergo either AV node ablation or AF ablation according to their allocated group. Follow-up will occur at 1 week (TTE and ECG) and at 6 months (repeat of baseline investigations). The primary endpoint will be change in left ventricular ejection fraction on TTE.

Conclusion

This is the first randomized controlled trial comparing AV node ablation and AF ablation in patients with CRT. We anticipate it will provide valuable insight into the management of this frequently encountered clinical scenario in a challenging patient cohort.

An aggressive solution for patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation: nodal ablation and cardiac resynchronization therapy

Heart failure and atrial fibrillation are two diseases that often coexist and contribute to worsening the prognosis and quality of life of patients. Managing this situation is still a challenge today. The ablation of the atrioventricular node associated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) fits into this context as a definitive but effective solution. Indeed, long-term positive results have been demonstrated in patients with atrial fibrillation ineligible for ablation and refractory to medical therapy in terms of symptom reduction and, more recently, also mortality. Furthermore, the role of this strategy in obtaining adequate biventricular pacing in patients who may benefit from CRT but are ineligible due to the presence of atrial fibrillation is being highlighted.

What Have We Learned in the Last 20 Years About CRT Non-Responders?

Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has become well established in the treatment of heart failure, the management of patients who do not respond after CRT remains a key challenge. This review will summarize what we have learned about non-responders over the last 20 years and discuss methods for optimizing response, including the introduction of novel therapies.

Junctional AV ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (JAVA-CRT): results of a multicenter randomized clinical trial pilot program

Introduction

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in sinus rhythm, but the data in atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited. Atrio-ventricular junctional ablation (AVJA) has been proposed as a remedy. The objective was to test if AVJA results in LV end-systolic volume (ESV) reduction ≥ 15% from baseline to 6 months.

Methods

The trial was a prospective multicenter randomized trial in 26 patients with permanent AF who were randomized 1:1 to CRT-D with or without AVJA.

Results

LVESV improved similarly by at least 15% in 5/10 (50%) in the CRT-D-only arm and in 6/12 (50%) in the AVJA + CRT-D arm (OR = 1.00 [0.14, 7.21], p = 1.00). In the CRT-D-only arm, the median 6-month improvement in LVEF was 9.2%, not different from the AVJA + CRT-D arm, 8.2%. When both groups were combined, a significant increase in LVEF was observed (25.4% at baseline vs 36.2% at 6 months, p = 0.002). NYHA class from baseline to 6 months for all patients combined improved 1 class in 15 of 24 (62.5%), whereas 9 remained in the same class and 0 degraded to a worse class.

Conclusion

In patients with permanent AF, reduced LVEF, and broad QRS who were eligible for CRT, there was insufficient evidence that AVJA improved echocardiographic or clinical outcomes; the results should be interpreted in light of a smaller than planned sample size. CRT, however, seemed to be effective in the combined study cohort overall, suggesting that CRT can be reasonably deployed in patients with AF.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02946853.

Atrial fibrillation associated with heart failure treated by a 2-lead CRT-DX system (BIO-AffectDX): Study design and clinical protocol

Background

Evidence to support use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among patients with both heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) is largely limited to retrospective or post hoc subanalyses. Data from a prospectively enrolled and contemporary cohort are needed.

Objective

We aim to better characterize the changes from baseline in HF patients with concomitant AF subsequently implanted with a 2-lead CRT-DX system capable of sensing in the atrium, aggregating diagnostics, and delivering CRT therapy. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the percentage of all HF subjects with an improvement in a clinical composite score from pre-CRT implant to 12 months.

Methods

The study is a US-based, prospective, observational multicenter clinical trial conducted at up to 50 sites and enrolling approximately 400 subjects with a follow-up period of 1 year. Multiple subject assessments, atrial rhythm status, and device interrogation will be collected at follow-up visits occurring at 3, 6, and 12 months postimplant.

Results

A Clinical Events Committee will adjudicate subject HF events, arrhythmia events, death events, and all device-classified ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation episodes with treatment that are collected throughout the follow-up period. Their decisions are based on independent physician review of the data from sites and device interrogation.

Conclusion

The BIO-AffectDX study aims to provide further insight into the expected outcomes from CRT treatment in patients with HF and AF.

Atrial fibrillation in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) were largely excluded from the major clinical trials of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), despite the presence of AF in up to 40% of patients receiving CRT in clinical practice. AF appears to attenuate the response to CRT, by the combination of a reduction in biventricular pacing and the loss of atrioventricular synchrony. In addition, remodeling secondary to CRT may influence the progression of AF. Management options for patients with AF and CRT include rate control, with drugs or atrioventricular node ablation, or rhythm control, with electrical cardioversion and antiarrhythmic therapy, or AF catheter ablation. The evidence for these therapies in patients with CRT is largely limited to observational studies or inferred from randomized studies in the general heart failure population. In this review, we explore the complex interaction between AF, heart failure, and CRT and discuss the evidence for the treatment options in this difficult patient cohort.

[Patient with a defibrillator for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) and progressive symptoms of heart failure]

A 73-year-old woman with advanced heart failure experienced a deterioration of symptoms and left ventricular function despite treatment with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The cause was diagnosed by 12-lead ECG and corrected by reprogramming, which led to an improvement in symptoms and echocardiography.

Heinzel F, Davos CH, Kudaiberdieva G, Frederix I, Svendsen JH, Hansen D. Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

Prevention of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: points to remember

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important and effective therapy for end-stage heart failure. Non-response to CRT is one of the main obstacles to its application in clinical practice. There is no uniform consensus or definition of CRT “response.” Clinical symptoms, ventricular remodeling indices, and cardiovascular events have been reported to be associated with non-responders. To prevent non-response to CRT, three aspects should be thoroughly considered: preoperative patient selection, electrode implantation, and postoperative management. Preoperative selection of appropriate patients for CRT treatment is an important step in preventing non-response. Currently, the CRT inclusion criteria are mainly based on the morphology of QRS waves in deciding ventricular dyssynchrony. Echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance are being explored to predict nonresponse to CRT. The location of left ventricular electrode implantation is a current hot spot of research; it is important to identify the location of the latest exciting ventricular segment and avoid scars. Cardiac magnetic resonance and ultrasonic spot tracking are being progressively developed in this field. Some new techniques such as His Bundle pacing, endocardial electrodes, and novel sensors are also being investigated. Postoperative management of patients is another essential step towards preventing non-response; it mainly focuses on the treatment of the disease itself and CRT program control optimization. CRT treatment is just one part of the overall treatment of heart failure, and multidisciplinary efforts are needed to improve the overall outcome.

Advances in cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioverter/defibrillator therapy: Medtronic Cobalt and Crome

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices have revolutionized the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. New device generations tend to be launched every few years, with incremental improvements in performance and safety and with an expectation that these will improve patient management and outcomes while remaining cost-effective. As a result, today's cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and implantable cardioverter defibrillator devices are quite different from the pioneering but often bulky devices of the late 20th century. This review discusses new and improved features developed to target specific needs in managing heart failure patients, some of which are especially pertinent to the current worldwide healthcare situation, with focus on the latest generation of CRTs with defibrillator (CRT-Ds) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators from Medtronic.

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.

Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

A Smart Service Platform for Cost Efficient Cardiac Health Monitoring

AIM

In this study we have investigated the problem of cost effective wireless heart health monitoring from a service design perspective.

SUBJECT AND METHODS

There is a great medical and economic need to support the diagnosis of a wide range of debilitating and indeed fatal non-communicable diseases, like Cardiovascular Disease (CVD), Atrial Fibrillation (AF), diabetes, and sleep disorders. To address this need, we put forward the idea that the combination of Heart Rate (HR) measurements, Internet of Things (IoT), and advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI), forms a Heart Health Monitoring Service Platform (HHMSP). This service platform can be used for multi-disease monitoring, where a distinct service meets the needs of patients having a specific disease. The service functionality is realized by combining common and distinct modules. This forms the technological basis which facilitates a hybrid diagnosis process where machines and practitioners work cooperatively to improve outcomes for patients.

RESULTS

Human checks and balances on independent machine decisions maintain safety and reliability of the diagnosis. Cost efficiency comes from efficient signal processing and replacing manual analysis with AI based machine classification. To show the practicality of the proposed service platform, we have implemented an AF monitoring service.

CONCLUSION

Having common modules allows us to harvest the economies of scale. That is an advantage, because the fixed cost for the infrastructure is shared among a large group of customers. Distinct modules define which AI models are used and how the communication with practitioners, caregivers and patients is handled. That makes the proposed HHMSP agile enough to address safety, reliability and functionality needs from healthcare providers.

Left ventricle automatic pacing threshold management in CRT systems: A comprehensive review

Modern cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device-based threshold detection enables capture management and voltage output adjusting to combine consistent left ventricular (LV) pacing with acceptable battery drainage. The current technologies available for LV capture automatic confirmation in most cases require the evoked response, as well as "LV pace to right ventricular sense" algorithms. The LV pacing percentage counter may overestimate the CRT delivery which may be reduced due to pacing inhibition (by sensed LV activation) or inadequate capture due to subthreshold current or pacing into refractory tissue. Moreover, the LV threshold at implant and its behavior over time (as a marker of electrical viability) and the ineffective CRT issues (subthreshold stimulation or concealed loss of capture) are discussed. The purpose of the present review is to explore these new challenges regarding LV pacing automatic management.

Change in indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy?

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has rapidly evolved as a standard therapy for heart failure (HF) patients with ventricular conduction delay. Although in early trials, only patients with sinus rhythm and advanced stages of HF have been candidates for CRT, more recent data have expanded the indications to patients with mild-to-moderate HF and atrial fibrillation and patients in need of antibradycardia pacing with reduced left ventricular function. On the other hand, it is now well recognized that patients with a wide QRS (>150 ms) and left bundle branch block morphology benefit most from CRT, whereas in patients with a more narrow QRS complex (<130 ms) CRT may actually be harmful despite the evidence of ventricular dyssynchrony by echocardiography. There is no prospective randomized study showing mortality benefit from a combined CRT defibrillating device over a CRT pacer alone. This is especially important because recent data indicate that older patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy may not benefit from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator as much as previously thought. Thus, the decision for a CRT pacer versus CRT defibrillating should be tailored to the therapeutic goal (improvement in prognosis versus symptomatic relief), patient age, underlying cardiac disease and comorbidities. This article gives an overview over the current indications for CRT according to published literature and the European guidelines for pacing and HF.

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.

Maximizing biventricular pacing in patients with rate-controlled atrial fibrillation using ventricular sense response

In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is challenging because the ventricular rate of conducted AF exceeds the biventricular pacing rate. In the current report, we present a patient who received a CRT device that was programmed to ventricular sense response (VSR) on with VVI 40 beats per minute to allow the AF to be paced as fusion beats. We found that the pacing configuration resulting in the narrowest QRS in this patient was VVI 40 with VSR biventricular fusion pacing during AF. VSR mode allows for CRT delivery without the need to artificially increase heart rate.

Optimizing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices in Follow-up to Improve Response Rates and Outcomes

Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) will improve symptoms and survival in selected heart failure patients, there still remains a high percentage of CRT recipients who do not obtain benefit from the therapy. During CRT follow-up, an effort should be made to identify and to treat reversible causes of nonresponse to CRT. This effort includes optimization of medical therapy, checking for appropriate and effective biventricular pacing, and treatment of arrhythmias and other reversible causes of CRT malfunction.

Role of Atrioventricular Junctional Ablation and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Chronic Atrial Fibrillation

There remains a great deal of uncertainty whether general application of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) to patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) provides any benefit assuming all other eligibility criteria are met. Preliminary observations suggest that performing atrioventricular junction ablation can improve the results of CRT in patients with AF by rendering the patient pacemaker dependent. Ongoing randomized clinical trials may provide more definitive answers in the future.

Increasing Role of Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices in Improving Outcomes

Remote monitoring has become an essential component of the care of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device, including those undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator implantations. It allows for earlier detection of battery- and lead-related issue, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, and may facilitate early identification of patients at risk for developing an exacerbation of heart failure. The data for the clinical utility of remote monitoring have been mixed. Additional studies are ongoing to determine how best to detect heart failure in these patients and how best to manage these patients based on the information.

Atrial fibrillation and conduction system disease: the roles of catheter ablation and permanent pacing

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and diseases of the cardiac conduction system frequently co-exist, and interactions between these rhythm disturbances can adversely impact patient outcomes. Concurrent AF and sinus node disease often manifests as the tachy-brady syndrome wherein the underlying sinus node dysfunction can pose a challenge to AF management. Similarly, the combination of AF and left bundle branch block increases mortality in individuals with co-existent heart failure and hampers effective delivery of cardiac resynchronization therapy. A thorough understanding of the therapeutic interventions available for these conditions, including the role of catheter ablation and permanent pacemaker programming, is crucial for optimal management in affected patients.

Role of Surface Electrocardiograms in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Surface electrocardiograms, both resting 12-lead electrocardiographs and ambulatory electrocardiograph monitoring, play an essential role in establishing indications for cardiac implantable electronic devices (pacemakers, cardiac implantable defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapies), and in the evaluation of patients already implanted. Current devices have prolonged memory capabilities (defined as Holter functions) and remote monitoring functions, to evaluate the electrical properties and the automatic detection of arrhythmias. Nonetheless, surface electrocardiography remains the critical tool to detect device malfunction, evaluate programming and function, verify the automatic arrhythmia analysis and the delivered electric therapy, and prevent inappropriate intervention.

Optimizing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: an Update on New Insights and Advancements

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses on the current advancements in optimizing patient response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

RECENT FINDINGS

It has been well known that not every patient will derive benefit from CRT, and of those that do, there are varying levels of response. Optimizing CRT begins well before device implant and involves appropriate patient selection and an understanding of the underlying substrate. After implant, there are different CRT device programming options that can be enabled to help overcome barriers as to why a patient may not respond. Given the multifaceted components of optimizing CRT and the complex patient population, multi-subspecialty clinics have been developed bringing together specialists in heart failure, electrophysiology, and imaging. Data as to whether this results in better response rates and outcomes shows promise.

Avoiding non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy: a practical guide

Over two decades after the introduction of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) into clinical practice, ∼30% of candidates continue to fail to respond to this highly effective treatment of drug-refractory heart failure (HF). Since the causes of this non-response (NR) are multifactorial, it will require multidisciplinary efforts to overcome. Progress has, thus far, been slowed by several factors, ranging from a lack of consensus regarding the definition of NR and technological limitations to the delivery of therapy. We critically review the various endpoints that have been used in landmark clinical trials of CRT, and the variability in response rates that has been observed as a result of these different investigational designs, different sample populations enrolled and different means of therapy delivered, including new means of multisite and left ventricular endocardial simulation. Precise recommendations are offered regarding the optimal device programming, use of telemonitoring and optimization of management of HF. Potentially reversible causes of NR to CRT are reviewed, with emphasis on loss of biventricular stimulation due to competing arrhythmias. The prevention of NR to CRT is essential to improve the overall performance of this treatment and lower its risk-benefit ratio. These objectives require collaborative efforts by the HF team, the electrophysiologists and the cardiac imaging experts.

Influence of automatic frequent pace-timing adjustments on effective left ventricular pacing during cardiac resynchronization therapy

Aims

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) requires effective left ventricular (LV) pacing (i.e. sufficient energy and appropriate timing to capture). The AdaptivCRT™ (aCRT) algorithm serves to maintain ventricular fusion during LV or biventricular pacing. This function was tested by comparing the morphological consistency of ventricular depolarizations and percentage effective LV pacing in CRT patients randomized to aCRT vs. echo-optimization.

Methods and results

Continuous recordings (≥20 h) of unipolar LV electrograms from aCRT (n = 38) and echo-optimized patients (n = 22) were analysed. Morphological consistency was determined by the correlation coefficient between each beat and a template beat. Effective LV pacing of paced beats was assessed by algorithmic analysis of negative initial EGM deflection in each evoked response. The %CRT pacing delivered, %effective LV pacing (i.e. % of paced beats with effective LV pacing), and overall %effective CRT (i.e. product of %CRT pacing and %effective LV pacing) were compared between aCRT and echo-optimized patients. Demographics were similar between groups. The mean correlation coefficient between individual beats and template was greater for aCRT (0.96 ± 0.03 vs. 0.91 ± 0.13, P = 0.07). Although %CRT pacing was similar for aCRT and echo-optimized (median 97.4 vs. 98.6%, P = 0.14), %effective LV pacing was larger for aCRT [99.6%, (99.1%, 99.9%) vs. 94.3%, (24.3%, 99.8%), P=0.03]. For aCRT vs. echo-optimized groups, the proportions of patients with ≥90% effective LV pacing was 92 vs. 55% (P = 0.002), and with ≥90% effective CRT was 79 vs. 45%, respectively (P = 0.018).

Conclusion

AdaptivCRT™ significantly increased effective LV pacing over echo-optimized CRT.

Technology Advances to Improve Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: What Clinicians Should Know

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a well-established treatment for symptomatic heart failure patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, prolonged QRS duration, and abnormal QRS morphology. The ultimate goals of modern CRT are to improve the proportion of patients responding to CRT and to maximize the response to CRT in patients who do respond. While the rate of CRT nonresponders has moderately but progressively decreased over the last 20 years, mostly in patients with left bundle branch block, in patients without left bundle branch block the response rate is almost unchanged. A number of technological advances have already contributed to achieve some of the objectives of modern CRT. They include novel lead design (the left ventricular quadripolar lead, and multipoint pacing), or the possibility to go beyond conventional delivery of CRT (left ventricular endocardial pacing, His bundle pacing). Furthermore, to improve CRT response, a triad of actions is paramount: reducing the burden of atrial fibrillation, reducing the number of appropriate and inappropriate interventions, and adequately predicting heart failure episodes. As in other fields of cardiology, technology and innovations for CRT delivery have been at the forefront in transforming-improving-patient care; therefore, these innovations are discussed in this review.