Real-world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence

Left Atrium Reverse Remodeling in Fusion CRT Pacing: Implications in Cardiac Resynchronization Response and Atrial Fibrillation Incidence

Background: When compared to biventricular pacing, fusion CRT pacing was linked to a decreased incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF). There is a gap in the knowledge regarding exclusive fusion CRT without interference with RV pacing, and all the current data are based on populations of patients with intermittent fusion pacing. Purpose: To assess left atrium remodeling and AF incidence in a real-life population of permanent fusion CRT-P. Methods: Retrospective data were analyzed from a cohort of patients with exclusive fusion CRT-P. Device interrogation, exercise testing, transthoracic echocardiography (TE), and customized medication optimization were all part of the six-monthly individual follow-up. Results: Study population: 73 patients (38 males) with non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy aged 63.7 ± 9.3 y.o. Baseline characteristic: QRS 159.8 ± 18.2 ms; EF 27.9 ± 5.1%; mitral regurgitation was severe in 38% of patients, moderate in 47% of patients, and mild in 15% of patients; 43% had type III diastolic dysfunction (DD), 49% had type II DD, 8% had type I DD. Average follow-up was 6.4 years ± 27 months: 93% of patients were responders (including 31% super-responders); EF increased to 40.4 ± 8.5%; mitral regurgitation decreased in 69% of patients; diastolic profile improved in 64% of patients. Paroxysmal and persistent AF incidence was 11%, with only 2% of patients developing permanent AF. Regarding LA volume, statistically significant LA reverse remodeling was observed. Conclusions: Exclusive fusion CRT-P was associated with important LA reverse remodeling and a low incidence of AF.

Association Between the Use of an Adaptive Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Algorithm and Health Care Use and Cost

OBJECTIVES

To assess the association between the use of adaptive pacing on clinical and economic outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients in a real-world analysis.

BACKGROUND

The adaptivCRT (aCRT) algorithm was shown in prior subgroup analyses of prospective trials to achieve clinical benefits, but a large prospective trial showed nonsignificant changes in the endpoint of mortality or hospitalizations due to heart failure.

METHODS

CRT-implanted patients from the Optum Clinformatics database with ≥ 90 days of follow-up were included. Remote monitoring data were used to classify patients based on CRT setting-adaptive biventricular and left ventricular pacing (aCRT) vs standard biventricular pacing (Standard CRT). Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline differences between groups. Mortality, 30-day readmissions, health care use, and payer and patients' costs were evaluated post-implantation.

RESULTS

This study included 2412 aCRT and 1638 Standard CRT patients (mean follow-up: 2.4 ± 1.4 years), with balanced baseline characteristics after adjustment. The aCRT group was associated with lower all-cause mortality rates (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI):0.80, 0.96]), fewer all-cause 30-day readmissions (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 0.87 [CI:0.81, 0.94]), and fewer all-cause and HF-related inpatient, outpatient and emergency department visits. The aCRT cohort was also associated with lower all-cause outpatient payer-paid amounts and lower all-cause and HF-related inpatient and emergency department patient-paid amounts.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis of a large real-world cohort, the use of an adaptive CRT algorithm was associated with lower mortality rates, reduced health care resource use and lower payer and patient costs.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) nonresponders in the contemporary era: A state-of-the-art review

In the 2000s, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) became a revolutionary treatment for heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) and wide QRS. However, about one-third of CRT recipients do not show a favorable response. This review of the current literature aims to better define the concept of CRT response/nonresponse. The diagnosis of CRT nonresponder should be viewed as a continuum, and it cannot rely solely on a single parameter. Moreover, baseline features of some patients might predict an unfavorable response. A strong collaboration between heart failure specialists and electrophysiologists is key to overcoming this challenge with multiple strategies. In the contemporary era, new pacing modalities, such as His-bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing, represent a promising alternative to CRT. Observational studies have demonstrated their potential; however, several limitations should be addressed. Large randomized controlled trials are needed to prove their efficacy in HFrEF with electromechanical dyssynchrony.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Clinical outcomes of automatic algorithms in cardiac resynchronization therapy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Algorithms to automatically adjust atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) intervals in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices are common, but their clinical efficacy is unknown.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate automatic CRT algorithms in patients with heart failure for the reduction of mortality, heart failure hospitalizations, and clinical improvement.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with CRT using automatic algorithms that change AV and VV intervals dynamically without manual input, on a beat-to-beat basis. We performed a subgroup analysis including intracardiac electrogram-based (EGM) algorithms and contractility-based algorithms.

Results

Nine RCTs with 8531 participants were included, of whom 4275 (50.1%) were randomized to automatic algorithm. Seven of the 9 trials used EGM-based algorithms, and 2 used contractility sensors. There was no difference in all-cause mortality (10.3% vs 11.3%; odds ratio [OR] 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.03; P = .13; I2 = 0%) or heart failure hospitalizations (15.0% vs 16.1%; OR 0.924; 95% CI 0.81-1.04; P = .194; I2 = 0%) between the automatic algorithm group and the control group. Study-defined clinical improvement was also not significantly different between groups (66.6% vs 63.3%; risk ratio 1.01; 95% CI 0.95-1.06; P = .82; I2 = 50%). In the contractility-based subgroup, there was a trend toward greater clinical improvement with the use of the automatic algorithm (75% vs 68.3%; OR 1.45; 95% CI 0.97-2.18; P = .07; I2 = 40%), which did not reach statistical significance. The overall risk of bias was low.

Conclusion

Automatic algorithms that change AV or VV intervals did not improve mortality, heart failure hospitalizations, or cardiovascular symptoms in patients with heart failure and CRT.

Adaptive versus conventional cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with heart failure (AdaptResponse): a global, prospective, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Continuous automatic optimisation of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), stimulating only the left ventricle to fuse with intrinsic right bundle conduction (synchronised left ventricular stimulation), might offer better outcomes than conventional CRT in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block, and normal atrioventricular conduction. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of adaptive CRT versus conventional CRT in patients with heart failure with intact atrioventricular conduction and left bundle branch block.

METHODS

This global, prospective, randomised controlled trial was done in 227 hospitals in 27 countries across Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with class 2-4 heart failure, an ejection fraction of 35% or less, left bundle branch block with QRS duration of 140 ms or more (male patients) or 130 ms or more (female patients), and a baseline PR interval 200 ms or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via block permutation to adaptive CRT (an algorithm providing synchronised left ventricular stimulation) or conventional biventricular CRT using a device programmer. All patients received device programming but were masked until procedures were completed. Site staff were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death or intervention for heart failure decompensation and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety events were collected and reported in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02205359, and is closed to accrual.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 5, 2014, and Jan 31, 2019, of 3797 patients enrolled, 3617 (95·3%) were randomly assigned (1810 to adaptive CRT and 1807 to conventional CRT). The futility boundary was crossed at the third interim analysis on June 23, 2022, when the decision was made to stop the trial early. 1568 (43·4%) of 3617 patients were female and 2049 (56·6%) were male. Median follow-up was 59·0 months (IQR 45-72). A primary outcome event occurred in 430 of 1810 patients (Kaplan-Meier occurrence rate 23·5% [95% CI 21·3-25·5] at 60 months) in the adaptive CRT group and in 470 of 1807 patients (25·7% [23·5-27·8] at 60 months) in the conventional CRT group (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·01; p=0·077). System-related adverse events were reported in 452 (25·0%) of 1810 patients in the adaptive CRT group and 440 (24·3%) of 1807 patients in the conventional CRT group.

INTERPRETATION

Compared with conventional CRT, adaptive CRT did not significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause death or intervention for heart failure decompensation in the included population of patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block, and intact AV conduction. Death and heart failure decompensation rates were low with both CRT therapies, suggesting a greater response to CRT occurred in this population than in patients in previous trials.

FUNDING

Medtronic.

The weakest point of cardiac resynchronization therapy: new technologies facing old terminology

Patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and left bundle branch block (LBBB) are currently treated with biventricular pacing (BiV) which has a Class IA recommendation. Given the possibility to re-establish the inter and intra-ventricular synchrony, BiV is commonly referred to as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). This wording is widely utilized and over time the terms BiV and CRT have become interchangeable. Conduction system pacing (CSP) is emerging as a valid therapeutic opportunity to obtain CRT restoring the native conduction via the Purkinje network. Therefore the acronym CRT is no longer synonymous with BiV only but could also refer to CSP. A terminology update is needed to include the resource of CSP to ensure better communication among all the stakeholders involved in managing recipients of cardiac devices and should be a fundamental step in advancing the quality of patient care. Making use of the NBG code to describe the implantable cardiac device would ease such terminology update, since only the first three positions of the five letters NBG code are commonly utilized, while the last two are rarely used.

Electrocardiographic imaging demonstrates electrical synchrony improvement by dynamic atrioventricular delays in patients with left bundle branch block and preserved atrioventricular conduction

AIMS

Cardiac resynchronization therapy programmed to dynamically fuse pacing with intrinsic conduction using atrioventricular (AV) timing algorithms (e.g. SyncAV) has shown promise; however, mechanistic data are lacking. This study assessed the impact of SyncAV on electrical dyssynchrony across various pacing modalities using non-invasive epicardial electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with left bundle-branch block (median QRS duration (QRSd) 162.7 ms) and intact AV conduction (PR interval 174.0 ms) were prospectively enrolled. ECGi was performed acutely during biventricular pacing with fixed nominal AV delays (BiV) and using SyncAV (optimized for the narrowest QRSd) during: BiV + SyncAV, LV-only single-site (LVSS + SyncAV), MultiPoint pacing (MPP + SyncAV), and LV-only MPP (LVMPP + SyncAV). Dyssynchrony was quantified via ECGi (LV activation time, LVAT; RV activation time, RVAT; LV electrical dispersion index, LVEDi; ventricular electrical uncoupling index, VEU; and biventricular total activation time, VVtat). Intrinsic conduction LVAT (124 ms) was significantly reduced by BiV pacing (109 ms) (P = 0.001) and further reduced by LVSS + SyncAV (103 ms), BiV + SyncAV (103 ms), LVMPP + SyncAV (95 ms), and MPP + SyncAV (90 ms). Intrinsic RVAT (93 ms), VVtat (130 ms), LVEDi (36 ms), VEU (50 ms), and QRSd (163 ms) were reduced by SyncAV across all pacing modes. More patients exhibited minimal LVAT, VVtat, LVEDi, and QRSd with MPP + SyncAV than any other modality.

CONCLUSION

Dynamic AV delay programming targeting fusion with intrinsic conduction significantly reduced dyssynchrony, as quantified by ECGi and QRSd for all evaluated pacing modes. MPP + SyncAV achieved the greatest synchrony overall but not for all patients, highlighting the value of pacing mode individualization during fusion optimization.

Association of left ventricular remodeling with cardiac resynchronization therapy outcomes

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response stratified by left ventricular (LV) remodeling revealed differing mortality profiles for distinct patient cohorts. Measuring functional end points, as well as mortality, may better assess CRT efficacy and inform patient management. However, the association between LV remodeling and functional outcomes after CRT is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate long-term CRT outcomes by extent of LV remodeling.

METHODS

REsynchronization reVErses Remodeling in Systolic Left vEntricular dysfunction (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00271154) was a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial of CRT. Subjects were classified on the basis of LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) change from baseline to 6 months post-CRT: worsened (increase), stabilized (0%-≤15% reduction), responder (>15%-<30% reduction), and super-responder (≥30% reduction). Subjects were evaluated annually for 5 years.

RESULTS

The analyses included 353 subjects randomized to CRT-ON arm. All-cause mortality was higher in the worsened group than in the other 3 response groups (29.8% vs 8.0%; P < .0001), with no difference in survival among those groups (P = .87). A significant interaction between the LVESV group and time was observed for health status and quality of life (P = .02 for both). The interaction was not significant for 6-minute hall walk (P = .79); however, super-responders had increased walk distance compared with the other 3 response groups (P = .03).

CONCLUSION

Preventing further increase in LVESV with CRT was associated with reduced mortality, whereas functional measure improvement was associated with LV remodeling magnitude. These results support the consideration of functional and mortality end points to assess CRT efficacy and provide further evidence that the dichotomous "responder and nonresponder" classification should be modified.

Real-world clinical burden among patients with and without heart failure worsening after cardiac resynchronization therapy

OBJECTIVE

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can improve cardiac function in patients with heart failure (HF); however, in some patients, HF worsens despite CRT. This study characterized the long-term clinical burden of patients with and without HF worsening (HFW) within 6 months post CRT implantation.

METHODS

A claims database (2007-2018) was used to identify two cohorts of adults: those with HFW within 180 days post-CRT and those with no HFW (NHFW). The evaluated clinical outcomes were cardiovascular events/complications, HF-related interventions, hospice enrollment, and all-cause mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for confounders; adjusted comparisons were assessed using weighted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

Among the 12,753 adults analyzed (HFW: N = 4,785; NHFW: N = 7,968), the mean age was 72 years and the mean duration of follow-up was approximately 2 years. The clinical burden was greater for HFW than for NHFW in terms of all-cause mortality (19.7% vs. 12.1%) and occurrence of atrial fibrillation (57.4% vs. 51.2%). In the IPTW-adjusted Cox proportional hazard analyses, patients with HFW had a 54% higher average hazard of experiencing all-cause mortality compared to NHFW (adjusted average HR = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-1.70; p < .001). Of the clinical events experienced by ≥5% of patients, the greatest differences in average hazard were for HF decompensation (adjusted average HR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.60-2.09) and HF decompensation or death (HR = 1.63, 95%CI: 1.50-1.77).

CONCLUSION

Patients with early HFW post-CRT experienced a significantly higher clinical burden than those without HFW. Vigilance for signs of worsening HF in the first 6 months post-CRT is warranted.

Treatment of cardiac resynchronization therapy non-responders: current approaches and new frontiers

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has developed into a very effective technology for patients with decreased systolic function and has substantially improved patients' clinical course. However, non-responsiveness to CRT, described as lack of reverse cardiac chamber remodeling, leading to lack to improve symptoms, heart failure hospitalizations or mortality, is common, rather unpredictable, and not fully understood.

AREAS COVERED

This article aims to discuss key factors that are impacting CRT response; from patient selection to LV lead position, to structured follow-up in CRT clinics. Secondly, common causes and interventions for CRT non-responsiveness are discussed. Next, insight is given into technologies representing new and feasible interventions as well as pacing strategies in this group of patients that remain challenging to treat. Finally, an outlook is given into future scientific development.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the progress that has been made, CRT non-response remains a significant and complex problem. Patient management in interdisciplinary teams including heart failure, imaging, and cardiac arrhythmia experts appears critical as complexity is increasing and CRT non-response often is a multifactorial problem. This will allow optimization of medical therapy, the use of new integrated sensor technologies and telemedicine to ultimately optimize outcomes for all patients in need of CRT.

Applying computable phenotypes within a common data model to identify heart failure patients for an implantable cardiac device registry

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Fusion Pacing with Biventricular, Left Ventricular-only and Multipoint Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: Latest Evidence and Strategies for Use

Despite advances in the field of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), response rates and durability of therapy remain relatively static. Optimising device timing intervals may be the most common modifiable factor influencing CRT efficacy after implantation. This review addresses the concept of fusion pacing as a method for improving patient outcomes with CRT. Fusion pacing describes the delivery of CRT pacing with a programming strategy to preserve intrinsic atrioventricular (AV) conduction and ventricular activation via the right bundle branch. Several methods have been assessed to achieve fusion pacing. QRS complex duration (QRSd) shortening with CRT is associated with improved clinical response. Dynamic algorithm-based optimisation targeting narrowest QRSd in patients with intact AV conduction has shown promise in people with heart failure with left bundle branch block. Individualised dynamic programming achieving fusion may achieve the greatest magnitude of electrical synchrony, measured by QRSd narrowing.

Adaptive Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Effect on Electrical Dyssynchrony (aCRT-ELSYNC): A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) is known to have clinical benefits over conventional CRT, but the mechanisms are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

Compare effects of aCRT and conventional CRT on electrical dyssynchrony.

METHODS

A prospective, double-blind, 1:1 parallel-group assignment randomized controlled trial in patients receiving CRT for routine clinical indications. Participants underwent cardiac computed tomography and 128-electrode body surface mapping. The primary outcome was change in electrical dyssynchrony measured on the epicardial surface using noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging before and 6 months post-CRT. Ventricular electrical uncoupling (VEU) was calculated as the difference between the mean left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) activation times. An electrical dyssynchrony index (EDI) was computed as the standard deviation of local epicardial activation times.

RESULTS

We randomized 27 participants (aged 64 ± 12 years; 34% female; 53% ischemic cardiomyopathy; LV ejection fraction 28% ± 8%; QRS duration 155 ± 21 ms; typical left bundle branch block [LBBB] in 13%) to conventional CRT (n = 15) vs aCRT (n = 12). In atypical LBBB (n = 11; 41%) with S waves in V5-V6, conduction block occurred in the anterior RV, as opposed to the interventricular groove in strict LBBB. As compared to baseline, VEU reduced post-CRT in the aCRT (median reduction 18.9 [interquartile range 4.3-29.2 ms; P = .034]), but not in the conventional CRT (21.4 [-30.0 to 49.9 ms; P = .525]) group. There were no differences in the degree of change in VEU and EDI indices between treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

The effect of aCRT and conventional CRT on electrical dyssynchrony is largely similar, but only aCRT harmoniously reduced interventricular dyssynchrony by reducing RV uncoupling.

Ventricular activation patterns during intrinsic conduction and right ventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) involves stimulation of both right ventricle (RV) and left ventricle (LV). LV pacing from the sites of delayed electrical activation improves CRT response. The RV-LV conduction is typically measured in intrinsic rhythm. The differences in RV-LV conduction patterns and timing between intrinsic rhythm and during paced RV activation, these differences are not fully understood.

METHODS

Enrolled patients were implanted with a de novo CRT device and quadripolar LV lead, with lead implant locations at the implanting physician's discretion. QRS duration and conduction delay between the RV lead and each of the four LV electrodes (D1, M2, M3, and P4) were measured during intrinsic conduction and RV pacing.

RESULTS

Conduction measurements were collected from 275 patients across 14 international centers (68 ± 13 years of age, 73% male, 45% ischemic, 158 ± 22 ms QRS duration). Mean RV-LV conduction time was shorter during intrinsic conduction versus RV pacing by 59.6 ms (106.5 ± 36.5 versus 166.1 ± 32.1 ms, p < 0.001). The intra-LV activation delay between the latest and earliest activating LV electrode was also shorter during intrinsic conduction versus RV pacing by 6.6 ms (20.6 ± 13.1 vs. 27.2 ± 21.2 ms, p < 0.001). Intrinsic conduction and RV pacing resulted in a different activation order in 72.7% of patients, and the same LV activation order in 27.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in RV-LV conduction time, intra-LV conduction time, and activation pattern were observed between intrinsic conduction and RV pacing. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating intrinsic versus paced ventricular activation to guide LV pacing site selection in CRT patients.

Gain in real-world cardiac resynchronization therapy efficacy with SyncAV dynamic optimization: Heart failure hospitalizations and costs

BACKGROUND

SyncAV, a device-based cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) algorithm, promotes electrical optimization by dynamically adjusting atrioventricular intervals.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of SyncAV on heart failure hospitalizations (HFHs) and related costs in a real-world CRT cohort.

METHODS

Patients with SyncAV-capable CRT devices followed by remote monitoring and enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service for at least 1 year preimplant and up to 2 years postimplant were studied. Patients with SyncAV OFF were 4:1 matched to those with SyncAV ON on preimplant HFH rate, demographics, comorbidities, disease etiology, and left bundle branch block. HFHs were determined from the primary diagnosis of inpatient hospitalizations, and the cost for each event was the sum of Medicare, supplemental insurance, and patient payment.

RESULTS

After 4:1 propensity score matching, 3630 patients were studied (mean age 75 ± 8 years; 1386 [38%] female), including 726 (25%) patients with SyncAV ON. The pre-CRT HFH rate was 0.338 HFH events per patient-year. Overall, CRT diminished the HFH rate to 0.204 events per patient-year (P < .001). SyncAV elicited a larger reduction in HFH rate (SyncAV ON: hazard ratio [HR] 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.66; P < .001 and SyncAV OFF: HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.59-0.77; P < .001). After 2 years, the HFH rate was lower in the SyncAV ON group than in the SyncAV OFF group (0.143 HFHs per patient-year vs 0.193 HFHs per patient-year; HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.55-0.89; P = .003) and fewer HFHs were followed by 30-day HFH readmissions (4.41% vs 7.68%; P = .003) and 30-day all-cause hospital readmissions (7.04% vs 10.01%; P = .010). The total 2-year HFH-associated costs per patient were lower with SyncAV ON (difference $1135; 90% CI $93-$2109; P = .038).

CONCLUSION

This large, real-world, propensity score-matched study demonstrates that SyncAV CRT is associated with significantly reduced HFHs and associated costs, incremental to standard CRT.

Comparative Trial of the Effects of Left Ventricular and Biventricular Pacing on Indices of Cardiac Function and Clinical Course of Patients With Heart Failure: Rationale and Design of the READAPT Randomized Trial

Nonresponse to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been related with right ventricular dysfunction. Ventriculoarterial coupling (VAC) assesses energy efficiency of the failing heart and stroke work maximization for a given contractility, for both systemic and pulmonary circulations. Preferential left ventricular pacing (pLVP) can overcome iatrogenic right ventricular dysfunction by achieving left ventricle resynchronization and by allowing for intrinsic activation of the right side, with ramifications extending beyond cardiac output and atrial fibrillation occurrence. In the present article, we detail the design of a single-center randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effects of a pLVP algorithm. More specifically, following randomization of 220 CRT-eligible patients to standard biventricular pacing and pLVP, their clinical course will be followed for 12 months, through echocardiography to study indices of systolic and diastolic function of ventricles, left and right side VAC to evaluate efficiency, and cardiopulmonary exercise test to objectively document improvements in functional status, as well as a self-reported quality of life questionnaire. Device programming will be based on echocardiography-evaluated maximization of stroke volume and subsequent interventricular and atrioventricular delay adjustments delegated to the device. Findings of this trial may provide evidence for alternative programming of the devices, linking pLVP to improved clinical outcomes.

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.

Redefining the Classifications of Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Results From the REVERSE Study

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the impact of a more detailed classification of response on survival.

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves functional status and outcomes in selected populations with heart failure (HF). However, approximately 30% of patients do not improve with CRT by various metrics, and they are traditionally classified as nonresponders.

METHODS

REVERSE (Resynchronization Reverses Remodeling in Systolic Left Ventricular Dysfunction) was a randomized trial of CRT among patients with mild HF. Patients were classified as Improved, Stabilized, or Worsened using prespecified criteria based on the clinical composite score (CCS) and change in left ventricular end-systolic volume index (LVESVi). All-cause mortality across CRT ON subgroups at 5 years was compared.

RESULTS

Of the 406 subjects surviving 1 year, 5-year survival differed between CCS subgroups (p = 0.03), with increased mortality in the Worsened response group. Of the 353 subjects with adequate echocardiograms, survival differed significantly between response groups (p < 0.001), also due to increased mortality in the Worsened group. When combining CCS and LVESVi results, the lowest survival was observed among subjects who worsened for both measures, whereas the highest survival occurred in subjects who did not worsen by either endpoint. Multivariate analysis showed that LVESVi worsening with CRT at 6 months, baseline LVESVi, and gender were independent predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

For both CCS and reverse remodeling, patients who worsen with CRT have a high mortality, although remodeling was the more important endpoint. Patients who stabilize early with CRT have a much better prognosis than previously recognized, suggesting that the current convention of nonresponder classification should be modified. (REVERSE [Resynchronization Reverses Remodeling in Systolic Left Ventricular Dysfunction]; NCT00271154).

Ventricular asystole in the presence of a biventricular device

In pacemaker-dependent patients with a newly implanted cardiac device, acute lead dislodgement constitutes one of the most common causes of loss of capture and ventricular asystole. In a biventricular system, it would be expected that such a potentially catastrophic event would be prevented with back-up right ventricular pacing unless both leads dislodge.

Real-world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence

Background

The AdaptivCRT (aCRT) algorithm continuously adjusts cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) according to intrinsic atrioventricular conduction, providing synchronized left ventricular pacing in patients with normal PR interval and adaptive BiV pacing in patients with prolonged PR interval. Previous analyses demonstrated an association between aCRT and clinical benefit. We evaluated the incidence of patient mortality and atrial fibrillation (AF) with aCRT compared with standard CRT in a real‐world population.

Methods and Results

Patients enrolled in the Medtronic Personalized CRT Registry and implanted with a CRT from 2013‐2018 were divided into aCRT ON or standard CRT groups based upon device‐stored data. A Frailty survival model was used to evaluate the potential survival benefit of aCRT, accounting for patient heterogeneity and center variability. Daily AF burden and first device‐detected AF episodes of various durations were recorded by the device during follow‐up.

A total of 1814 CRT patients with no reported long‐standing AF history at implant were included. Mean follow‐up time was 26.1 ± 16.5 months and 1162 patients (64.1%) had aCRT ON. Patient survival probability at 36 months was 88.3% for aCRT ON and 83.7% for standard CRT (covariate‐adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53‐0.96, P = .028). Mean AF burden during follow‐up was consistently lower in aCRT ON patients compared with standard CRT. At 36 months, the probability of AF was lower in patients with aCRT ON, regardless of which AF definition threshold was applied (6 minutes‐30 days, all P < .001).

Conclusion

Use of the AdaptivCRT algorithm was associated with improved patient survival and lower incidence of AF in a real‐world, prospective, nonrandomized registry.