Evaluation of R-wave offset in the left chest leads for estimating the left ventricular activation delay: An evaluation based on coronary sinus electrograms and the 12-lead electrocardiogram

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.

Mobile Cardiac Acoustic Monitoring System to Evaluate Left Ventricular Systolic Function in Pacemaker Patients

The mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system is a promising tool to enable detection and assist the diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). The objective of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of electromechanical activation time (EMAT), an important cardiac acoustic biomarker, in quantifying LVSD among left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and right ventricular apical pacing (RVAP) patients using a mobile acoustic cardiography monitoring system. In this prospective single-center observational study, pacemaker-dependent patients were consecutively enrolled. EMAT, the time from the start of the pacing QRS wave to first heart sound (S1) peak; left ventricular systolic time (LVST), the time from S1 peak to S2 peak; and ECG were recorded simultaneously by the mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system. LVEF was measured by echocardiography. A logistic regression model was applied to evaluate the association between EMAT and reduced EF (LVEF < 50%). A total of 105 pacemaker-dependent patients participated. The RVAP group (n = 58) displayed a significantly higher EMAT than the LBBP group (n = 47) (150.95 ± 19.46 vs. 108.23 ± 12.26 ms, p < 0.001). Pearson correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant negative correlation between EMAT and LVEF (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed the sensitivity and specificity of detecting LVEF to be < 50% when EMAT ≥ 151 ms were 96.00% and 96.97% in the RVAP group. In LBBP patients, the sensitivity and specificity of using EMAT ≥ 110 ms as the cutoff value for the detection of LVEF < 50% were 75.00% and 100.00%. There was no significant difference in LVST with or without LVSD in the RVAP group (p = 0.823) and LBBP group (p = 0.086). Compared to LVST, EMAT was more helpful to identify LVSD in pacemaker-dependent patients. The cutoff point of EMAT for diagnosing LVEF < 50% differed regarding the pacing type. Therefore, the mobile cardiac acoustic monitoring system can be used to identify the progress of LVSD in pacemaker patients.

SNTA1 gene rescues ion channel function and is antiarrhythmic in cardiomyocytes derived from induced pluripotent stem cells from muscular dystrophy patients

Background

Patients with cardiomyopathy of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) are at risk of developing life-threatening arrhythmias, but the mechanisms are unknown. We aimed to determine the role of ion channels controlling cardiac excitability in the mechanisms of arrhythmias in DMD patients.

Methods

To test whether dystrophin mutations lead to defective cardiac NaV1.5-Kir2.1 channelosomes and arrhythmias, we generated iPSC-CMs from two hemizygous DMD males, a heterozygous female, and two unrelated control males. We conducted studies including confocal microscopy, protein expression analysis, patch-clamping, non-viral piggy-bac gene expression, optical mapping and contractility assays.

Results

Two patients had abnormal ECGs with frequent runs of ventricular tachycardia. iPSC-CMs from all DMD patients showed abnormal action potential profiles, slowed conduction velocities, and reduced sodium (INa) and inward rectifier potassium (IK1) currents. Membrane NaV1.5 and Kir2.1 protein levels were reduced in hemizygous DMD iPSC-CMs but not in heterozygous iPSC-CMs. Remarkably, transfecting just one component of the dystrophin protein complex (α1-syntrophin) in hemizygous iPSC-CMs from one patient restored channelosome function, INa and IK1 densities, and action potential profile in single cells. In addition, α1-syntrophin expression restored impulse conduction and contractility and prevented reentrant arrhythmias in hiPSC-CM monolayers.

Conclusions

We provide the first demonstration that iPSC-CMs reprogrammed from skin fibroblasts of DMD patients with cardiomyopathy have a dysfunction of the NaV1.5-Kir2.1 channelosome, with consequent reduction of cardiac excitability and conduction. Altogether, iPSC-CMs from patients with DMD cardiomyopathy have a NaV1.5-Kir2.1 channelosome dysfunction, which can be rescued by the scaffolding protein α1-syntrophin to restore excitability and prevent arrhythmias.

Funding

Supported by National Institutes of Health R01 HL122352 grant; 'la Caixa' Banking Foundation (HR18-00304); Fundación La Marató TV3: Ayudas a la investigación en enfermedades raras 2020 (LA MARATO-2020); Instituto de Salud Carlos III/FEDER/FSE; Horizon 2020 - Research and Innovation Framework Programme GA-965286 to JJ; the CNIC is supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (MCIN) and the Pro CNIC Foundation), and is a Severo Ochoa Center of Excellence (grant CEX2020-001041-S funded by MICIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033). American Heart Association postdoctoral fellowship 19POST34380706s to JVEN. Israel Science Foundation to OB and MA [824/19]. Rappaport grant [01012020RI]; and Niedersachsen Foundation [ZN3452] to OB; US-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) to OB and TH [2019039]; Dr. Bernard Lublin Donation to OB; and The Duchenne Parent Project Netherlands (DPPNL 2029771) to OB. National Institutes of Health R01 AR068428 to DM and US-Israel Binational Science Foundation Grant [2013032] to DM and OB.

Novel electrocardiographic dyssynchrony criteria that may improve patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an evidence-based effective therapy of symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction refractory to optimal medical treatment associated with intraventricular conduction disturbance, that results in electrical dyssynchrony and further deterioration of systolic ventricular function. However, the non-response rate to CRT is still 20%-40%, which can be decreased by better patient selection. The main determinant of CRT outcome is the presence or absence of significant ventricular dyssynchrony and the ability of the applied CRT technique to eliminate it. The current guidelines recommend the determination of QRS morphology and QRS duration and the measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction for patient selection for CRT. However, QRS morphology and QRS duration are not perfect indicators of electrical dyssynchrony, which is the cause of the not negligible non-response rate to CRT and the missed CRT implantation in a significant number of patients who have the appropriate substrate for CRT. Using imaging modalities, many ventricular dyssynchrony criteria were devised for the detection of mechanical dyssynchrony, but their utility in patient selection for CRT is not yet proven, therefore their use is not recommended for this purpose. Moreover, CRT can eliminate only mechanical dyssynchrony due to underlying electrical dyssynchrony, for this reason ECG has a greater role in the detection of ventricular dyssynchrony than imaging modalities. To improve assessment of electrical dyssynchrony, we devised two novel ECG dyssynchrony criteria, which can estimate interventricular and left ventricular intraventricular dyssynchrony in order to improve patient selection for CRT. Here we discuss the results achieved by the application of these new ECG dyssynchrony criteria, which proved to be useful in predicting the CRT response in patients with nonspecific intraventricular conduction disturbance pattern (the second greatest group of CRT candidates), and the significance of other new ECG dyssynchrony criteria in the potential improvement of CRT outcome.

Differentiating left bundle branch pacing and left ventricular septal pacing: An algorithm based on intracardiac electrophysiology

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a new near-physiological pacing modality. Distinguishing left ventricular septal only pacing (LVSP) from nonselective LBBP still needs clarification. This prospective study sought to establish a differentiation algorithm to confirm LBBP.

METHODS AND RESULTS

LBBP was attempted in consecutive patients. If direct LBB capture (LBBP) could not be confirmed, LVSP was considered to have been achieved. Intracardiac left ventricular (LV) activation sequence and activation time were analyzed using coronary sinus (CS) electrogram mapping. Electrophysiological parameters including S-CSmax, S-CSmin, LV lateral wall activation time, ΔLV, and LBB potential were compared between LBBP and LVSP. Stimulated LV activation time (S-LVAT) and stimulated QRS duration (S-QRSd) were also compared between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to develop a prediction algorithm for LBBP. Of the 43 prospectively enrolled patients, 27 underwent LBBP and 16 underwent LVSP. All LBBP patients showed identical LV activation sequences to their intrinsic rhythm while no LVSP patients maintained their intrinsic sequence. S-CSmax, ΔLV, LV lateral wall activation time, and S-LVAT during LBBP were significantly shorter than those during LVSP. Combining LBB potential with S-LVAT had the largest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.985 for confirming LBBP with a sensitivity of 95.2% and a specificity of 93.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with LVSP, LBBP preserves a normal LV activation sequence and better electrical synchrony. A combination of LBB potential with S-LVAT can be an effective and practical model to distinguish LBBP from LVSP during implantation in patients with normal LBB activation.

The QR-max index, a novel electrocardiographic index for the determination of left ventricular conduction delay and selection of cardiac resynchronization in patients with non-left bundle branch block

Non-left bundle branch block (non-LBBB) remains an uncertain indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Non-LBBB includes right bundle branch block (RBBB) and non-specific LV conduction delay (NSCD), two different electrocardiogram (ECG) patterns which are not generally considered to be associated with LV conduction delay as judged by the invasive assessment of the Q-LV interval. We evaluated whether a novel ECG interval (QR-max index) correlated with the degree of LV conduction delay regardless of the type of non-LBBB ECG pattern, and could, therefore, predict CRT response. In 173 non-LBBB patients on CRT (92 NSCD, 81 RBBB), the QR-max index was measured as the maximum interval from QRS onset to R-wave offset in the limb leads. The correlation between QR-max index and Q-LV interval and the impact of the QR-max index on time to first heart failure hospitalization during 3-year follow-up were assessed. Q-LV correlated better with the QR-max index than with QRSd, particularly in the RBBB group (r = 0.91; p < 0.001 vs. r = 0.19; p < 0.089), while the correlations were r = 0.79 (p < 0.01) and r = 0.68 (p < 0.01), respectively, in the NSCD group. In both groups, the QR-max index was significantly more able than QRSd to identify CRT responders (AUC 0.825 vs. 0.576; p = 0.0008 in RBBB; AUC 0.738 vs. 0.701; p = 0.459 in NSCD). A QR-max index exceeding a cutoff value of 120 ms was associated with CRT response, with predictive values of 86.8 and 81.4% in RBBB and NSCD, respectively. The QR-max index reflects the degree of LV electrical delay regardless of QRS duration in RBBB and NSCD patients and is a useful indicator of suitability for CRT in non-LBBB patients.