Exploring a New Systematic Route for Left Ventricular Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

BACKGROUND

Frequency and distribution of left ventricular (LV) venous collaterals were studied in vivo to evaluate the ease and feasibility of implanting a new ultra-thin LV quadripolar microlead for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).Methods and Results:Evaluable venograms were analyzed to define the prevalence of venous collaterals (>0.5 mm diameter) between: (1) different LV segments; and (2) different major LV veins in: unselected patients who underwent CRT from 2008 to 2012 at Rouen Hospital, France (retrospective); and CRT patients from the Axone Acute pilot study in 2018 (prospective). In prospective patients with evaluable venograms, LV microlead implantation was attempted. Thirty-six (21/65 retrospective, 15/20 prospective) patients had evaluable venograms with ≥1 visible venous collaterals. Collaterals were found between LV veins in all CRT patients with evaluable venograms. Regionally, prevalence was highest between: the apical inferior and apical lateral (42%); and mid inferior and mid inferolateral (42%) segments. Collateral connections were most prevalent between: the inferior interventricular vein (IIV) and lateral vein (64% [23/36]); and IIV and infero-lateral vein (36% [13/36]). Cross-vein microlead implantation was possible in 18 patients (90%), and single-vein implantation was conducted in the other 2 patients (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Venous collaterals were found in vivo between LV veins in all CRT patients with evaluable venograms, making this network an option for accessing multiple LV sites using a single LV microlead.

Multisite pacing and myocardial scars: a computational study

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a frequently effective treatment modality for dyssynchronous heart failure, however, 30% of patients do not respond, usually due to suboptimal activation of the left ventricle (LV). Multisite pacing (MSP) may increase the response rate, but its effect in the presence of myocardial scars is not fully understood. We use a computational model to study the outcome of MSP in an LV with scars in two different locations and of two different sizes. The LV was stimulated from anterior, posterior and lateral locations individually and in pairs, while a septal stimulation site represented right ventricular (RV) pacing. Intraventricular pressures were measured, and outcomes evaluated in terms of maximum LV pressure gradient (dP/dt_max)- change compared to isolated RV pacing. The best result obtained using various LV pacing locations included a combination of sites remote from scars and the septum. The highest dP/dt_max increase was achieved, regardless of scar size, using MSP with one pacing site located on the LV free wall opposite to the scar and one site opposite to the septum. These in silico modelling results suggest that making placement of pacing electrodes dependent on location of scarring, may alter acute haemodynamics and that such modelling may contribute to future CRT optimization.

Benefits of Multisite/Multipoint Pacing to Improve Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response

This article provides a general overview of the underlying mechanisms that support pacing from more discrete points and/or a wider vector (multisite and multipoint pacing) to improve left ventricular resynchronization. We performed a critical overview of the current literature and to identify some remaining knowledge gaps to spur further research. It was not our goal to provide a systematic review with a comprehensive bibliography, but rather to focus on selected publications that, in our opinion, have either expertly reviewed a specific aspect of cardiac resynchronization therapy or have been landmark studies in the field.

Cardiac resynchronization is pro-arrhythmic in the absence of reverse ventricular remodelling: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been shown to reduce mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization but its effects on the rate of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) appears to be neutral. We hypothesize that CRT with LV epicardial stimulation is inherently pro-arrhythmic and increases VA rates in the absence of reverse ventricular remodelling while conferring an anti-arrhythmic effect in mechanical responders.

Methods and results

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we considered retrospective cohort, prospective cohort, and randomized controlled trials comparing VA rates between cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) non-responders, CRT-D responders and those with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) only. Studies were eligible if they defined CRT-D responders using a discrete left ventricular volumetric value as assessed by any imaging modality. Studies were identified through searching electronic databases from their inception to July 2017. We identified 2579 citations, of which 23 full-text articles were eligible for final analysis. Our results demonstrated that CRT-D responders were less likely to experience VA than CRT-D non-responders, relative risk (RR) 0.49 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.58, P < 0.01] and also less than patients with ICD only: RR 0.59 (95% CI 0.50-0.69, P < 0.01). However, CRT-D mechanical non-responders had a greater likelihood of VA compared with ICD only, RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.63-0.92, P = 0.004).

Conclusion

CRT-D non-responders experienced more VA than CRT-D responders and also more than those with ICD only, suggesting that CRT with LV epicardial stimulation may be inherently pro-arrhythmic in the absence of reverse remodelling.

Comparison of triple-site ventricular pacing versus conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with systolic heart failure: A meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies

Background

Conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT, Bi‐V) is associated with no response in about 40% patients due to an insufficient resynchronization. Some studies showed triple‐site ventricular (Tri‐V) pacing had greater benefits compared with Bi‐V pacing, but the results of these studies were conflicting. We hypothesized that Tri‐V pacing had greater benefits on long‐term outcomes compared with Bi‐V pacing in patients with heart failure.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for clinical studies with related outcomes. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare the change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular geometry, functional capacity, and quality of life between Tri‐V pacing group and control group.

Results

Five trials with 251 patients were included in the analysis. Patients in the Tri‐V pacing group had a greater improvement in LVEF (WMD 4.04; 95% CI 2.15‐5.92, P < .001) and NYHA classes (WMD −0.27; 95% CI −0.42 to −0.11, P = .001) compared with control group. However, there were no significant differences in left ventricular geometry, six‐min walk distance, or Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire score between the two groups. The subgroup analyses showed there might be a greater improvement in LVEF in the Tri‐V pacing group in patients with QRS duration ≥ 155 ms (WMD 5.60; 95% CI 3.09‐8.10, P < .001).

Conclusions

The present analysis suggests that Tri‐V pacing has greater benefits in terms of an improvement in LVEF and functional capacity in patients with systolic heart failure, especially in patients with the duration of QRS ≥ 155 ms.

Innovative pacing: Recent advances, emerging technologies, and future directions in cardiac pacing

The field of cardiovascular medicine is rapidly evolving as advancements in technology and engineering provide clinicians new and exciting ways to care for an aging population. Cardiac pacing, in particular, has seen a series of game-changing technologies emerge in the past several years spurred by low-power electronics, high density batteries, improved catheter delivery systems and innovative software design. We look at several of these emerging pacemaker technologies, discussing the rationale, current state and future directions of these pioneering developments in electrophysiology.

Triple-site pacing for cardiac resynchronization in permanent atrial fibrillation - Acute phase results from a prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Multi-site pacing is emerging as a new method for improving response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but has been little studied, especially in patients with atrial fibrillation. We aimed to assess the effects of triple-site (Tri-V) vs. biventricular (Bi-V) pacing on hemodynamics and QRS duration.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study of patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and ejection fraction <40% undergoing CRT implantation (n=40). One right ventricular (RV) lead was implanted in the apex and another in the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) septal wall. A left ventricular (LV) lead was implanted in a conventional venous epicardial position. Cardiac output (using the FloTrac™ Vigileo™ system), mean QRS and ejection fraction were calculated.

RESULTS

Mean cardiac output was 4.81±0.97 l/min with Tri-V, 4.68±0.94 l/min with RVOT septal and LV pacing, and 4.68±0.94 l/min with RV apical and LV pacing (p<0.001 for Tri-V vs. both BiV). Mean pre-implantation QRS was 170±25 ms, 123±18 ms with Tri-V, 141±25 ms with RVOT septal pacing and LV pacing and 145±19 with RV apical and LV pacing (p<0.001 for Tri-V vs. both BiV and pre-implantation). Mean ejection fraction was significantly higher with Tri-V (30±11%) vs. Bi-V pacing (28±12% with RVOT septal and LV pacing and 28±11 with RV apical and LV pacing) and pre-implantation (25±8%).

CONCLUSION

Tri-V pacing produced higher cardiac output and shorter QRS duration than Bi-V pacing. This may have a significant impact on the future of CRT.

Optimizing CRT - Do We Need More Leads and Delivery Methods

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapeutic option in symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and evidence of left ventricular (LV) conduction delay (QRS width ≥120 ms), especially when typical left bundle branch block is present. The rationale behind CRT is restoration of aberrant LV electrical activation. As there is considerable heterogeneity of the LV electrical activation pattern among CRT candidates, an individualized approach with targeting of the LV lead in the region of latest electrical activation while avoiding scar tissue may enhance CRT response. Echocardiography, electro anatomic mapping, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with late gadolinium enhancement are helpful to guide such targeted LV lead placement. However, an important limitation remains the anatomy of the coronary sinus, which often does not allow concordant LV lead placement in the optimal region. Epicardial LV lead placement through minimal invasive surgery or endocardial LV lead placement through transseptal punction may overcome this limitation, obviously with an increased complication risk. Furthermore, recent pacing algorithms suggest superiority of LV-only versus biventricular pacing in patients with preserved atrio ventricular (AV) conduction and a typical LBBB pattern. Finally, pacing from only one LV site might not overcome the wide electrical dispersion often seen in patients with LV conduction delays. Therefore, multisite pacing has gained significant interest to improve CRT response. The use of multiple LV leads may potentially lead to more favorable reverse remodeling, improved functional capacity and quality of life in CRT candidates, but adverse events and a shorter battery span are more frequent because of the extra lead. The use of one multipolar LV lead increases the number of pacing configurations within the same coronary sinus side branch (within small distances from each other) without the use of an additional lead. Small observational studies suggest that more effective resynchronization can be achieved with this approach. Finally, there are many reasons for non effective CRT delivery in carefully selected patients with an adequately implanted device. Multidisciplinary, post implantation care inside a dedicated CRT clinic ensures optimal CRT delivery, improves response rate and should be considered standard of care.

Multisite left ventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy is an effective treatment for selected patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block dyssynchrony. Unfortunately, about a third of patients, so-called nonresponders, do not display any symptomatic or structural improvements after the treatment. In another 5% of patients, the left ventricular lead cannot be implanted due to technical limitations. Novel quadripolar pacing lead and associated multisite pacing technology has the potential to help improve both of these problems. The technology and applications of these leads are reviewed and the novel technique of multisite pacing from two poles of one quadripolar lead is discussed. This technology may improve response to cardiac resynchronization therapy for some patients.