Evaluating Electrocardiography-Based Identification of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Responders Beyond Current Left Bundle Branch Block Definitions

Long-Term Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients With Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

A growing number of patients with tetralogy of Fallot develop left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure, in addition to right ventricular dysfunction. Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment option, the effect of CRT in this population is still not well defined. This study aimed to investigate the early and late efficacy, survival, and safety of CRT in patients with tetralogy of Fallot.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from an observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort, initiated jointly by the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society and the International Society of Adult Congenital Heart Disease. Twelve centers contributed baseline and longitudinal data, including vital status, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), QRS duration, and NYHA functional class. Outcomes were analyzed at early (3 months), intermediate (1 year), and late follow-up (≥2 years) after CRT implantation.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients (40.3±19.2 years) with tetralogy of Fallot and CRT were enrolled. Twenty-nine (65.9%) patients had right ventricular pacing before CRT upgrade. The left ventricular ejection fraction improved from 32% [24%-44%] at baseline to 42% [32%-50%] at early follow-up (P<0.001) and remained improved from baseline thereafter (P≤0.002). The QRS duration decreased from 180 [160-205] ms at baseline to 152 [133-182] ms at early follow-up (P<0.001) and remained decreased at intermediate and late follow-up (P≤0.001). Patients with upgraded CRT had consistent improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction and QRS duration at each time point (P≤0.004). Patients had a significantly improved New York Heart Association functional class after CRT implantation at each time point compared with baseline (P≤0.002). The transplant-free survival rates at 3, 5, and 8 years after CRT implantation were 85%, 79%, and 73%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with tetralogy of Fallot treated with CRT consistent improvement in QRS duration, left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association functional class, and reasonable long-term survival were observed. The findings from this multicenter study support the consideration of CRT in this unique population.

Implications of ventricular arrhythmia after cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Conflicting data are available on whether ventricular arrhythmia (VA) or shock therapy increases mortality. Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces the risk of VA, little is known about the prognostic value of VA among patients with CRT devices.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implications of VA as a prognostic marker for CRT.

METHODS

We investigated 330 CRT patients within 1 year after CRT device implantation. The primary endpoint was the composite endpoint of all-cause death or hospitalization for heart failure.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients had VA events. These patients had a significantly higher risk of the primary endpoint, even among CRT responders (P = .009). Fast VA compared to slow VA was associated with an increased risk of the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-4.34; P = .035). Shock therapy was not associated with a primary endpoint (shock therapy vs antitachycardia pacing: HR 1.49; 95% CI 0.73-3.03; P = .269). The patients with VA had a lower prevalence of response to CRT (23 [53%] vs 202 [70%]; P = .031) and longer left ventricular paced conduction time (174 ± 23 ms vs 143 ± 36 ms; P = .003) than the patients without VA.

CONCLUSION

VA occurrence within 1 year was related to paced electrical delay and poor response to CRT. VA could be associated with poor prognosis among CRT patients.

Useful Electrocardiographic Signs to Support the Prediction of Favorable Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a cornerstone therapeutic opportunity for selected patients with heart failure. For optimal patient selection, no other method has been proven to be more effective than the 12-lead ECG, and hence ECG characteristics are extensively researched. The evaluation of particular ECG signs before the implantation may improve selection and, consequently, clinical outcomes. The definition of a true left bundle branch block (LBBB) seems to be the best starting point with which to select patients for CRT. Although there are no universally accepted definitions of LBBB, using the classical LBBB criteria, some ECG parameters are associated with CRT response. In patients with non-true LBBB or non-LBBB, further ECG predictors of response and non-response could be analyzed, such as QRS fractionation, signs of residual left bundle branch conduction, S-waves in V6, intrinsicoid deflection, or non-invasive estimates of Q-LV which are described in newer publications. The most important and recent study results of the topic are summarized and discussed in this current review.

Comparison of the relation of the ESC 2021 and ESC 2013 definitions of left bundle branch block with clinical and echocardiographic outcome in cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to investigate the impact of the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline changes in left bundle branch block (LBBB) definition on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patient selection and outcomes.

METHODS

The MUG (Maastricht, Utrecht, Groningen) registry, consisting of consecutive patients implanted with a CRT device between 2001 and 2015 was studied. For this study, patients with baseline sinus rhythm and QRS duration ≥ 130ms were eligible. Patients were classified according to ESC 2013 and 2021 guideline LBBB definitions and QRS duration. Endpoints were heart transplantation, LVAD implantation or mortality (HTx/LVAD/mortality) and echocardiographic response (LVESV reduction ≥15%).

RESULTS

The analyses included 1.202, typical CRT patients. The ESC 2021 definition resulted in considerably less LBBB diagnoses compared to the 2013 definition (31.6% vs. 80.9%, respectively). Applying the 2013 definition resulted in significant separation of the Kaplan-Meier curves of HTx/LVAD/mortality (p < .0001). A significantly higher echocardiographic response rate was found in the LBBB compared to the non-LBBB group using the 2013 definition. These differences in HTx/LVAD/mortality and echocardiographic response were not found when applying the 2021 definition.

CONCLUSION

The ESC 2021 LBBB definition leads to a considerably lower percentage of patients with baseline LBBB then the ESC 2013 definition. This does not lead to better differentiation of CRT responders, nor does this lead to a stronger association with clinical outcomes after CRT. In fact, stratification according to the 2021 definition is not associated with a difference in clinical or echocardiographic outcome, implying that the guideline changes may negatively influence CRT implantation practice with a weakened recommendation in patients that will benefit from CRT.

Electrocardiogram-based deep learning improves outcome prediction following cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

This study aims to identify and visualize electrocardiogram (ECG) features using an explainable deep learning-based algorithm to predict cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) outcome. Its performance is compared with current guideline ECG criteria and QRSAREA.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A deep learning algorithm, trained on 1.1 million ECGs from 251 473 patients, was used to compress the median beat ECG, thereby summarizing most ECG features into only 21 explainable factors (FactorECG). Pre-implantation ECGs of 1306 CRT patients from three academic centres were converted into their respective FactorECG. FactorECG predicted the combined clinical endpoint of death, left ventricular assist device, or heart transplantation [c-statistic 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.72], significantly outperforming QRSAREA and guideline ECG criteria [c-statistic 0.61 (95% CI 0.58-0.64) and 0.57 (95% CI 0.54-0.60), P < 0.001 for both]. The addition of 13 clinical variables was of limited added value for the FactorECG model when compared with QRSAREA (Δ c-statistic 0.03 vs. 0.10). FactorECG identified inferolateral T-wave inversion, smaller right precordial S- and T-wave amplitude, ventricular rate, and increased PR interval and P-wave duration to be important predictors for poor outcome. An online visualization tool was created to provide interactive visualizations (https://crt.ecgx.ai).

CONCLUSION

Requiring only a standard 12-lead ECG, FactorECG held superior discriminative ability for the prediction of clinical outcome when compared with guideline criteria and QRSAREA, without requiring additional clinical variables. End-to-end automated visualization of ECG features allows for an explainable algorithm, which may facilitate rapid uptake of this personalized decision-making tool in CRT.

Cardiac resynchronization considerations in left bundle branch block

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via biventricular pacing (BiVP) is an established treatment for patients with left ventricular systolic heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay resulting in wide QRS. Seminal trials demonstrating mortality benefit from CRT were conducted in patients with wide left bundle branch block (LBBB) pattern on electrocardiogram (ECG) and evidence of clinical heart failure. The presence of conduction block was assumed to correlate with commonly applied criteria for LBBB. More recent data has challenged this assertion, revealing that LBBB pattern may include distinct underlying pathophysiology, including patients with complete conduction block, either at the left-sided His fibers or the proximal left bundle, intact Purkinje activation with wide LBBB-like QRS, and patients demonstrating both proximal block and distal delay. Currently, BiVP-CRT is indicated for all QRS duration ≥150 ms and may be considered for BBB patterns from 130 to 149 ms with robust clinical data to support its use. Despite this, however, there remains a significant number of non-responders to BVP. Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as an alternative approach to deliver CRT and correct QRS in patients with conduction block. Newer hybrid approaches which combine CSP and traditional BiVP-CRT and may hold promise for patients with IP or mixed-level block. As various approaches to CRT continue to be studied, physiologic phenotyping of the LBBB pattern remains an important consideration.

What Intracardiac Tracings Have Taught Us About Left Bundle Branch Block

Current electrocardiogram (ECG) criteria for left bundle branch block (LBBB) are largely based on early work in animal models or on mathematical models of cardiac activation. The resulting criteria have modest specificity, and up to one-third of patients who meet current ECG criteria for LBBB may have intact conduction through their His-Purkinje systems. Intracardiac tracings offer the ability to accurately discriminate between LBBB and other causes of delayed activation, which may facilitate the development of more accurate ECG criteria. Assessing these distinctions are particularly salient to applications for conduction system pacing.

Defining left bundle branch block according to the new 2021 European Society of Cardiology criteria

Correctly diagnosing left bundle branch block (LBBB) is fundamental, as LBBB occurs frequently in heart failure and may trigger a vicious cycle of progressive left ventricular dysfunction. Moreover, a correct diagnosis of LBBB is pivotal to guide cardiac resynchronisation therapy. Since the LBBB diagnostic criteria were recently updated by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), we assessed their diagnostic accuracy compared with the previous ESC 2013 definition. We further discuss the complexity of defining LBBB within the context of recent insights into the electromechanical pathophysiology of LBBB.

OUP accepted manuscript

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

Does mechanical dyssynchrony in addition to QRS area ensure sustained response to cardiac resynchronization therapy?

Aims

Judicious patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) may further enhance treatment response. Progress has been made by using improved markers of electrical dyssynchrony and mechanical discoordination, using QRS_AREA, and systolic rebound stretch of the septum (SRSsept) or systolic stretch index (SSI), respectively. To date, the relation between these measurements has not yet been investigated.

Methods and results

A total of 240 CRT patients were prospectively enrolled from six centres. Patients underwent standard 12-lead electrocardiography, and echocardiography, at baseline, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up. QRS_AREA was derived using vectorcardiography, and SRSsept and SSI were measured using strain-analysis. Reverse remodelling was measured as the relative decrease in left ventricular end-systolic volume, indexed to body surface area (ΔLVESVi). Sustained response was defined as ≥15% decrease in LVESVi, at both 6- and 12-month follow-up. QRS_AREA and SRSsept were both strong, multivariable adjusted, variables associated with reverse remodelling. SRSsept was associated with response, but only in patients with QRS_AREA ≥ 120 μVs (AUC = 0.727 vs. 0.443). Combined presence of SRSsept ≥ 2.5% and QRS_AREA ≥ 120 μVs significantly increased reverse remodelling compared with high QRS_AREA alone (ΔLVESVi 38 ± 21% vs. 22 ± 21%). As a result, 92% of left bundle branch block (LBBB)-patients with combined electrical and mechanical dysfunction were ‘sustained’ volumetric responders, as opposed to 51% with high QRS_AREA alone.

Conclusion

Parameters of mechanical dyssynchrony are better associated with response in the presence of a clear underlying electrical substrate. Combined presence of high SRSsept and QRS_AREA, but not high QRS_AREA alone, ensures a sustained response after CRT in LBBB patients.

Aortic valve implantation-induced conduction block as a framework towards a uniform electrocardiographic definition of left bundle branch block

Introduction

New-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) following transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement (LBBB_AVI) implies a proximal pathogenesis of LBBB. This study compares electrocardiographic characteristics and concordance with LBBB definitions between LBBB_AVI and non-procedure-induced LBBB controls (LBBB_control).

Methods

All LBBB_AVI patients at Ghent University Hospital between 2013 and 2019 were enrolled in the study. LBBB_AVI patients were matched for age, sex, ischaemic heart disease and ejection fraction to LBBB_control patients in a 1:2 ratio. For inclusion, a non-strict LBBB definition was used (QRS duration ≥ 120 ms, QS or rS in V1, absence of Q waves in V5-6). Electrocardiograms were digitally analysed and classified according to three LBBB definitions: European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Strauss and American Heart Association (AHA).

Results

A total of 177 patients (59 LBBB_AVI and 118 LBBB_control) were enrolled in the study. LBBB_AVI patients had more lateral QRS notching/slurring (100% vs 85%, p = 0.001), included a higher percentage with a QRS duration ≥ 130 ms (98% vs 86%, p = 0.007) and had a less leftward oriented QRS axis (−15° vs −30°, p = 0.013) compared to the LBBB_control group. ESC and Strauss criteria were fulfilled in 100% and 95% of LBBB_AVI patients, respectively, but only 18% met the AHA criteria. In LBBB_control patients, concordance with LBBB definitions was lower than in the LBBB_AVI group: ESC 85% (p = 0.001), Strauss 68% (p < 0.001) and AHA 7% (p = 0.035). No differences in electrocardiographic characterisation or concordance with LBBB definitions were observed between LBBB_AVI and LBBB_control patients with lateral QRS notching/slurring.

Conclusion

Non-uniformity exists among current LBBB definitions concerning the detection of proximal LBBB. LBBB_AVI may provide a framework for more consensus on defining proximal LBBB.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-021-01565-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Optimizing lead placement for pacing in dyssynchronous heart failure: The patient in the lead

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) greatly reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. However, despite tremendous efforts, response has been variable and can be further improved. Although optimizing left ventricular lead placement (LVLP) is arguably the cornerstone of CRT, the procedure of LVLP using the transvenous approach has remained largely unchanged for more than 2 decades. Improvements have been developed using scar location and electrical and/or mechanical mapping, and interest in conduction system pacing as an alternative to biventricular pacing has emerged recently. Conduction system pacing is promising but may not be suitable for all patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. This review underscores the importance of a patient-tailored approach and discusses the potential applications of both conduction system pacing and targeted biventricular CRT.

[Association of left bundle branch block definitions with response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with congestive heart failure]

Aim To compare diagnostic significance of different criteria for complete left bundle branch block (cLBBB) in prediction of reverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling associated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).Materials and methods This study included 93 patients (men, 81.7 %; mean age at the time of implantation, 56.6±9.3 years). Achievement of a maximum decrease in LV end-systolic volume (ESV) was recorded during the entire follow-up period for evaluation of LV reversibility by CRT. Based on the dynamics of LV ESV, patients were divided into two groups, non-responders (n=27) and responders (n=66). cLBBB was determined by 9 criteria (ESC 2006 and 2013, AHA 2009, Strauss, and MIRACLE, CARE-HF, MADIT-CRT, REVERSE, and RAFT used in large multicenter studies).Results Incidence of cLBBB was significantly higher in the group of responders as demonstrated by the AHA (p=0.001), ESC 2013 (p=0.014), Strauss (p=0.002), MADIT-CRT (p=0.014), REVERSE (p=0.013), and RAFT (p&lt;0.001) criteria. The highest specificity was shown for the AHA and RAFT (92.6 %) criteria, and the highest sensitivity and overall accuracy were shown for the Strauss (80.3 % and 72.04 %, respectively) criterium. The criteria proposed in actual clinical guidelines (AHA and ESC 2013) demonstrated a strong consistency in detecting cLBBB (κ=0.818, 95 % CI, 0.7-0.936; p&lt;0.001). However, the Strauss and ESC 2006 / AHA / ESC 2013 showed the least consistency in identifying cLBBB. For the criteria described in large multicenter studies, consistency in detecting cLBBB was minimal in most cases. However, criteria with moderate or strong consistency were used in the studies, which results have substantiated the use of cLBBB as a selection criterium (MADIT-CRT, REVERSE, and RAFT).Conclusion The reversibility of LV remodeling associated with CRT was different in patients with cLBBB determined by different criteria. All actual cLBBB criteria (AHA, ESC 2013, and Strauss) were significantly more frequently observed in the responder group. Nevertheless, these criteria differed in their sensitivity and specificity. A number of large multicenter studies have used criteria with minimal consistency in detecting cLBBB, which should be taken into account in interpreting results of these studies.