Increases in repolarization heterogeneity predict left ventricular systolic dysfunction and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left bundle branch block

Outcomes with T-wave discordance of left bundle branch block and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes for patients with heart failure. The prognosis of LBBB in patients with a preserved ejection fraction (EF) remains controversial. This study investigated the predictive value of T-wave discordance for the prognosis of patients with LBBB and preserved or mildly reduced EF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We enrolled 707 patients with complete LBBB and left ventricular (LV) EF ≥ 40% observed using electrocardiograms (ECGs) and echocardiograms between January 2010 and December 2018. Their serial ECGs were reviewed during the follow-up period. The T-wave pattern was classified as discordant LBBB (dLBBB) or concordant LBBB (cLBBB) according to the 12-lead ECG T-wave morphology. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure during a median follow-up period of 3.1 years. A multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the independent predictors of the primary outcome. Patients with dLBBB had more comorbidities, a higher heart rate, a longer QRS and QTc duration, a larger LV end-systolic volume and left atrial dimension, a lower LVEF, and a higher mitral E/A ratio and E/e', compared with those with cLBBB. Older age [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.023, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.001-1.046, P = 0.023], history of heart failure (HR = 2.440, 95% CI = 1.524-3.905, P = 0.001), chronic kidney disease (HR = 1.917, 95% CI = 1.182-3.110, P = 0.008), larger LV end-systolic volume (HR = 1.046, 95% CI = 1.017-1.075, P = 0.002), lower LVEF (HR = 0.916, 95% CI = 0.885-0.948, P = 0.001), and presence of dLBBB (HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.011-2.628, P = 0.032) were independent predictors of the primary outcome in patients with LBBB and LVEF ≥ 40%. The discordant or concordant T-wave morphology of LBBB could transform from one subtype to the other in up to 23% of the study population during the follow-up period, and individuals with persistent or transformed dLBBB faced an increased risk of cardiovascular death or non-fatal heart failure hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with LBBB and EF ≥ 40%, dLBBB serves as an independent predictor of a higher risk of cardiovascular death or non-fatal heart failure hospitalization.

Association of vectorcardiographic T-wave area with clinical and echocardiographic outcomes in cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

Data on repolarization parameters in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are scarce. We investigated the association of baseline T-wave area, with both clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of CRT in a large, multi-centre cohort of CRT recipients. Also, we evaluated the association between the baseline T-wave area and QRS area.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this retrospective study, 1355 consecutive CRT recipients were evaluated. Pre-implantation T-wave and QRS area were calculated from vectorcardiograms. Echocardiographic response was defined as a reduction of ≥15% in left ventricular end-systolic volume between 3 and 12 months after implantation. The clinical outcome was a combination of all-cause mortality, heart transplantation, and left ventricular assist device implantation. Left ventricular end-systolic volume reduction was largest in patients with QRS area ≥ 109 μVs and T-wave area ≥ 66 μVs compared with QRS area ≥ 109 μVs and T-wave area < 66 μVs (P = 0.004), QRS area < 109 μVs and T-wave area ≥ 66 μVs (P < 0.001) and QRS area < 109 μVs and T-wave area < 66 μVs (P < 0.001). Event-free survival rate was higher in the subgroup of patients with QRS area ≥ 109 μVs and T-wave area ≥ 66 μVs (n = 616, P < 0.001) and QRS area ≥ 109 μVs and T-wave area < 66 μVs (n = 100, P < 0.001) than the other subgroups. In the multivariate analysis, T-wave area remained associated with echocardiographic response (P = 0.008), but not with the clinical outcome (P = 0.143), when QRS area was included in the model.

CONCLUSION

Baseline T-wave area has a significant association with both clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after CRT. The association of T-wave area with echocardiographic response is independent from QRS area; the association with clinical outcome, however, is not.

Changes of repolarization parameters after left bundle branch area pacing and the association with echocardiographic response in heart failure patients

Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has become a safe and effective option for heart failure (HF) patients indicated for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and/or ventricular pacing, yet the response rate was only 70%. Repolarization parameters were demonstrated to be associated with cardiac mechanics and systolic function. This study aimed to investigate the effects of LBBAP on repolarization parameters and the potential association between those parameters and echocardiographic response.

Methods and results: A total of 59 HF patients undergoing successful LBBAP were consecutively included. QTc, Tpeak-Tend (TpTe), and TpTe/QTc were measured before and after the implantation. The results turned out that the dispersion of ventricular repolarization (DVR) improved after LBBAP among the total population. Although trends of repolarization parameters varied according to different QRS configurations at baseline, the post-implant parameters showed no significant difference between groups. The association between repolarization parameters and LBBAP response was then evaluated among patients with wide QRS. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that post-implant TpTe was the independent predictor of LBBAP response (p < 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated an area under the curve of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.60–0.93) with a cutoff value of 81.2 ms (p < 0.01). Patients with post-implant TpTe<81.2 ms had a significantly higher rate of echocardiographic response (93.3 vs. 44.4%, p < 0.01). Further subgroup analysis indicated that the predictive value of post-implant TpTe for LBBAP response was more significant in non-left bundle branch block (LBBB) patients than in LBBB patients.

Conclusion: LBBAP improved DVR significantly in HF patients. Post-implant TpTe was associated with the echocardiographic response after LBBAP among patients with wide QRS, especially for non-LBBB patients.