Site-Specific Differences in Latency Intervals during Biventricular Pacing: Impact on Paced QRS Morphology and Echo-Optimized V-V Interval

Recent Advances in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Current Treatment and Future Direction

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) has been established as a major component of heart failure management, resulting in a significant reduction in patient morbidity and death for patients with increased QRS duration, low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and high risk of arrhythmias. The ability to synchronize both ventricles, lower heart failure hospitalizations, and optimize clinical outcomes are some of the attractive characteristics of biventricular pacing, or CRT. However, the high rate of CRT non-responders has led to the development of new modalities including leadless CRT pacemakers (CRT-P) and devices focused on conduction system pacing (CSP). This comprehensive review aims to present recent findings from CRT clinical trials and systematic reviews that have been published that will likely guide future directions in patient care.

Multicenter Hemodynamic Assessment of the LOT-CRT Strategy: When Does Combining Left Bundle Branch Pacing and Coronary Venous Pacing Enhance Resynchronization?: Primary Results of the CSPOT Study

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) may be an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We sought to compare the acute hemodynamic and ECG effects of LBBAP, BVP, and left bundle-optimized therapy CRT (LOT-CRT) in CRT candidates with advanced conduction disease.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, 48 patients with either nonspecific interventricular conduction delay (n=29) or left bundle branch block (n=19) underwent acute hemodynamic testing to determine the change in left ventricular pressure maximal first derivative (LV dP/dtmax) from baseline atrial pacing to BVP, LBBAP, or LOT-CRT.

RESULTS

Atrioventricular-optimized increases in LV dP/dtmax for LOT-CRT (mean, 25.8% [95% CI, 20.9%-30.7%]) and BVP (26.4% [95% CI, 20.2%-32.6%]) were greater than unipolar LBBAP (19.3% [95% CI, 15.0%-23.7%]) or bipolar LBBAP (16.4% [95% CI, 12.7%-20.0%]; P≤0.005). QRS shortening was greater in LOT-CRT (29.5 [95% CI, 23.4-35.6] ms) than unipolar LBBAP (11.9 [95% CI, 6.1-17.7] ms), bipolar LBBAP (11.7 ms [95% CI, 6.4-17.0]), or BVP (18.5 [95% CI, 11.0-25.9] ms), all P≤0.005. Compared with patients with left bundle branch block, patients with interventricular conduction delay experienced less QRS reduction (P=0.026) but similar improvements in LV dP/dtmax (P=0.29). Bipolar LBBAP caused anodal capture in 54% of patients and resulted in less LV dP/dtmax improvement than unipolar LBBAP (18.6% versus 23.7%; P<0.001). Subclassification of LBBAP capture (European Heart Rhythm Association criteria) indicated LBBAP or LV septal pacing in 27 patients (56%) and deep septal pacing in 21 patients (44%). The hemodynamic benefit of adding left ventricular coronary vein pacing to LBBAP depended on baseline QRS duration (P=0.031) and success of LBBAP (P<0.004): LOT-CRT provided 14.5% (5.0%-24.1%) greater LV dP/dtmax improvement and 20.8 (12.8-28.8) ms greater QRS shortening than LBBAP in subjects with QRS ≥171 ms and deep septal pacing capture type.

CONCLUSIONS

In a CRT cohort with advanced conduction disease, LOT-CRT and BVP provided greater acute hemodynamic benefit than LBBAP. Subjects with wider QRS or deep septal pacing are more likely to benefit from the addition of a left ventricular coronary vein lead to implement LOT-CRT.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04905290.

Imaging in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: part 2-imaging after device implantation. A clinical consensus statement of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) improve quality of life and prolong survival, but there are additional considerations for cardiovascular imaging after implantation-both for standard indications and for diagnosing and guiding management of device-related complications. This clinical consensus statement (part 2) from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, provides comprehensive, up-to-date, and evidence-based guidance to cardiologists, cardiac imagers, and pacing specialists regarding the use of imaging in patients after implantation of conventional pacemakers, cardioverter defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. The document summarizes the existing evidence regarding the role and optimal use of various cardiac imaging modalities in patients with suspected CIED-related complications and also discusses CRT optimization, the safety of magnetic resonance imaging in CIED carriers, and describes the role of chest radiography in assessing CIED type, position, and complications. The role of imaging before and during CIED implantation is discussed in a companion document (part 1).

Conduction System Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Although conventional biventricular pacing has been shown to benefit patients with heart failure and conduction system disease, there are limitations to its therapeutic success, resulting in widely variable clinical response. Limitations of conventional biventricular pacing evolve around myocardial scar, fibrosis, and inability to effectively stimulate diseased tissue. Several observational and acute hemodynamic studies have demonstrated improved electrical resynchronization and echocardiographic response with conduction system pacing. This article provides a systematic review of conduction system pacing as a physiologic alternative to conventional CRT, which is currently undergoing rigorous investigation.

The evolution of cardiac resynchronization therapy and an introduction to conduction system pacing: a conceptual review

In chronic systolic heart failure and conduction system disease, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the only known non-pharmacologic heart failure therapy that improves cardiac function, functional capacity, and survival while decreasing cardiac workload and hospitalization rates. While conventional bi-ventricular pacing has been shown to benefit patients with heart failure and conduction system disease, there are limitations to its therapeutic success, resulting in widely variable clinical response. Limitations of conventional CRT evolve around myocardial scar, fibrosis, and inability to effectively simulate diseased tissue. Studies have shown endocardial stimulation in closer proximity to the specialized conduction system is more effective when compared with epicardial stimulation. Several observational and acute haemodynamic studies have demonstrated improved electrical resynchronization and echocardiographic response with conduction system pacing (CSP). Our objective is to provide a systematic review of the evolution of CRT, and an introduction to CSP as an intriguing, though experimental physiologic alternative to conventional CRT.

Electrocardiographic patterns in biventricular pacing delivered by second-generation cardiac resynchronization devices

BACKGROUND

With increasing use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), treating physicians should be familiar with different electrocardiographic (ECG) patterns of left ventricular (LV) lead and biventricular (BiV) pacing. However, there are a few publications on ECG patterns during BiV pacing.

PURPOSE

This study was sought to determine different ECG patterns in patients with BiV pacing.

METHODS

Twelve-lead ECGs during BiV pacing (right ventricular leads at apex and LV leads in one of the lateral coronary veins) were analyzed in 181 consecutive patients (121 male; mean age, 62.0 ± 13.5 years) with advanced heart failure and baseline left bundle branch block pattern after at least 6-month of uncomplicated CRT.

RESULTS

During BiV pacing, 65% of the patients showed a dominant R wave in V1. There was a right axis deviation in 57% in frontal plane. However, a left superior axis emerged in 34% and normal frontal plane axis in 9%. Sequential BiV pacing (73% vs. 58%, P = 0.04) and pacing from posterolateral coronary vein (80% vs. 60%, p = 0.045) were more likely to present with a dominant R wave in V1. In sequential pacing, AV interval was significantly longer in patients with negative complex in V1 than in those with positive complex (124 ± 21 vs. 116 ± 8.0, p = 0.005). A Q/q wave was detected in 85% of patients in lead I and 78% in lead aVL.

CONCLUSIONS

BiV pacing from lateral coronary venous branches and right ventricular apex characteristically presented with dominant R wave in V1, Q/q wave in leads I and aVL, and right or left superior axis. However, a negative complex in V1, QRS axis in other quadrants, and lack of Q/q wave in leads I and aVL did not necessarily indicate a problem.

Multi-scale, tailor-made heart simulation can predict the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

The currently proposed criteria for identifying patients who would benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) still need to be optimized. A multi-scale heart simulation capable of reproducing the electrophysiology and mechanics of a beating heart may help resolve this problem. The objective of this retrospective study was to test the capability of patient-specific simulation models to reproduce the response to CRT by applying the latest multi-scale heart simulation technology.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We created patient-specific heart models with realistic three-dimensional morphology based on the clinical data recorded before treatment in nine patients with heart failure and conduction block treated by biventricular pacing. Each model was tailored to reproduce the surface electrocardiogram and hemodynamics of each patient in formats similar to those used in clinical practice, including electrocardiography (ECG), echocardiography, and hemodynamic measurements. We then performed CRT simulation on each heart model according to the actual pacing protocol and compared the results with the clinical data. CRT simulation improved the ECG index and diminished wall motion dyssynchrony in each patient. These results, however, did not correlate with the actual response. The best correlation was obtained between the maximum value of the time derivative of ventricular pressure (dP/dt_max) and the clinically observed improvement in the ejection fraction (EF) (r=0.94, p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

By integrating the complex pathophysiology of the heart, patient-specific, multi-scale heart simulation could successfully reproduce the response to CRT. With further verification, this technique could be a useful tool in clinical decision making.

Ventricular pacing - Electromechanical consequences and valvular function

Although great strides have been made in the areas of ventricular pacing, it is still appreciated that dyssynchrony can be malignant, and that appropriately placed pacing leads may ameliorate mechanical dyssynchrony. However, the unknowns at present include: 1. The mechanisms by which ventricular pacing itself can induce dyssynchrony; 2. Whether or not various pacing locations can decrease the deleterious effects caused by ventricular pacing; 3. The impact of novel methods of pacing, such as atrioventricular septal, lead-less, and far-field surface stimulation; 4. The utility of ECG and echocardiography in predicting response to therapy and/or development of dyssynchrony in the setting of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) lead placement; 5. The impact of ventricular pacing-induced dyssynchrony on valvular function, and how lead position correlates to potential improvement. This review examines the existing literature to put these issues into context, to provide a basis for understanding how electrical, mechanical, and functional aspects of the heart can be distorted with ventricular pacing. We highlight the central role of the mitral valve and its function as it relates to pacing strategies, especially in the setting of CRT. We also provide future directions for improved pacing modalities via alternative pacing sites and speculate over mechanisms on how lead position may affect the critical function of the mitral valve and thus overall efficacy of CRT.

ECG Patterns In Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy is an established treatment modality in heart failure. Though non-response is a serious issue. To address this issue, a good understanding of the electrical activation during underlying intrinsic ventricular activation, biventricular as well as right- and left ventricular pacing is needed. By interpreting the 12-lead electrocardiogram, possible reasons for suboptimal treatment can be identified and addressed. This article reviews the literature on QRS morphology in cardiac resynchronization therapy and its role in optimization of therapy.

Noninvasive pacing study via pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for differentiating right from left atrial flutter

BACKGROUND

Patients with atrial flutter who are implanted with a pacemaker (PM) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) present with the opportunity to perform a noninvasive pacing study (NIPS) using the right atrial pacing lead to differentiate right from left atrial flutter.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to study the feasibility and accuracy of NIPS to distinguish right from left atrial flutter.

METHODS

We enrolled consecutive patients scheduled for an electrophysiological study or ablation procedure who were in atrial flutter and who were implanted with a PM or ICD with a functional atrial lead in the right atrial appendage. Flutter tachycardia cycle lengths (TCLs) and postpacing intervals (PPIs) were measured noninvasively via the device during the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 48 (67%) patients were studied. Right atrial flutter was present in 32 patients (of whom 29 had typical cavotricuspid isthmus-dependent flutter) and 16 (33%) patients had left atrial flutter. A PPI-TCL interval of >100 ms was 100% specific and 81% sensitive to identify left atrial flutter, with an overall accuracy of 94% and a c statistic of 0.94 (95% confidence interval 0.87-1.00). A PPI-TCL interval of ≤100 ms had a positive predictive value of 86% for diagnosing typical flutter.

CONCLUSION

NIPS via PMs and ICDs with a PPI-TCL interval of >100 ms can reliably identify left atrial flutter (although we have only validated this cutoff for leads implanted in the right atrial appendage). This simple maneuver may allow planning for left-sided access and may avoid an unnecessary invasive electrophysiological study if left atrial flutter ablation is not to be considered.

The postimplantation electrocardiogram predicts clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Biventricular (BiV) pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is intended to improve left ventricular function by coordinating systolic activity of the septum and free walls. Optimal resynchronization should be manifested by 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) patterns consistent with resynchronized activation, a tall (≥4 mm) R wave in V1, and predominant negative deflection in lead I (RV1SI). We investigated whether the presence or absence of RV1SI predicts heart failure outcomes within 1 year of CRT implant.

METHODS

Two independent physicians reviewed the paced ECG of 213 patients post-CRT device implantation with disputes resolved by a third reviewer. The primary end points of all-cause death, unplanned hospitalization, left ventricular assist device implant, or transplant within a 1-year follow-up were blindly adjudicated according to standard definitions. Groups were compared via Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models to determine association with event-free survival.

RESULTS

Among CRT patients postimplantation, 56 (26.3%) exhibited the RV1SI pattern on ECG. Patients with the RV1SI pattern were significantly less likely to achieve the primary end point as compared to patients without the RV1SI pattern (33.9% vs 52.2%; Log Rank P = 0.022). This difference was driven by a significantly lower risk for unplanned hospitalization among patients with the RV1SI pattern (hazard ratio = 0.510; confidence interval [0.298, 0.876]). The predictive value remained after adjustment for potential confounders (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The 12-lead ECG postimplantation predicts clinical outcomes of BiV pacing. Such prediction may be useful in predicting the need for alternative or advanced heart failure therapies. Further study into ECG patterns may help to prospectively guide CRT.

Electrocardiographic diagnosis of biventricular pacing in patients with nonapical right ventricular leads

BACKGROUND

Assessment of left ventricular (LV) capture is of paramount importance in patients with biventricular (BiV) pacing. Our goal was to identify electrocardiographic features that differentiate between BiV and right ventricular (RV)-only pacing in patients with nonapical RV leads.

METHODS

The study enrolled 300 consecutive patients with BiV devices and nonapical RV leads, and obtained from them 558 electrocardiograms with either BiV pacing (n = 300) or RV-only pacing (n = 258). RV pacing served as a surrogate for loss of LV capture. Electrocardiograms from the first 150 patients were used to identify BiV-specific features, and to construct an algorithm to differentiate between BiV and RV-only pacing. Electrocardiograms from the second 150 patients were used to validate the algorithm.

RESULTS

The following electrocardiographic features typical of BiV pacing were identified: QS in lead V6 (specificity = 98.7%, sensitivity = 54.7%), dominant R in lead V1 (specificity = 100%, sensitivity = 23.3%), q in lead V6 (specificity = 96%, sensitivity = 22.7%), and a QRS < 160 ms (specificity = 100%, sensitivity = 66.0%). The algorithm based on those features was found to have an overall diagnostic accuracy of 95.0%, a specificity of 96.0%, and a sensitivity of 93.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified QRS features that were very specific for BiV pacing in patients with nonapical RV leads. Sequential arrangement of those features resulted in an algorithm that was very accurate for differentiating between BiV pacing and loss of LV capture.

Ventricular activation sequence during left ventricular pacing promotes QRS complex oversensing in the atrial channel

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular (LV)-only pacing has a significant effect on delay in depolarization of parts of the ventricles that are likely oversensed in the right atrial channel. The study aimed to assess the impact of ventricular activation sequence on QRS oversensing and far-field endless-loop pacemaker tachycardia (ELT) in patients who received cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices.

METHODS

The study examined 102 patients with CRT devices. Oversensing artifacts in the atrial channel were inspected on intracardiac electrograms, and their timing with respect to the beginning of QRS was determined during DDD-right ventricular (RV), DDD-LV, DDD-biventricular (BiV), and AAI pacing modes. The occurrence of ELT during DDD-LV pacing with a postventricular atrial refractory period (PVARP) of 250 ms was also assessed.

RESULTS

The timing of oversensing artifacts (in relation to the beginning of surface QRS) was dependent on ventricular activation sequence, occurring promptly following intrinsic activation via the right bundle branch (47.1 ± 26.4 ms), later during RV pacing (108.7 ± 22.5 ms) or BiV pacing (109.4 ± 23.1 ms), and significantly later, corresponding to the final part of the QRS, during LV pacing (209.6 ± 40.0 ms, range: 140-340 ms, P < 0.001). Oversensing was significantly more frequent during LV than during RV pacing (35.3% vs 22.5%, P < 0.001). Far-field ELT was observed in six patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Oversensing artifacts in the atrial channel are likely caused by depolarization of the basal part of the right ventricle. The novel mechanism of QRS oversensing outside PVARP, caused by a reversed ventricular activation sequence during LV-only pacing, may be important in some CRT patients.