2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Follow-up of CRT-D patients downgraded to CRT-P at the time of generator exchange

Background

Some patients with cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) experience super-response (LVEF improvements to ≥50%). At generator exchange (GE), downgrading (DG) from CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) to CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) could be an option for these patients on primary prevention ICD indication and no required ICD therapies. Long-term data on arrhythmic events in super-responders is scarce.

Methods

CRT-D patients with LVEF improvement to ≥50% at GE were identified in four large centres for retrospective analysis. Mortality, significant ventricular tachyarrhythmia and appropriate ICD-therapy were determined, and patient analysis was split into two groups (downgraded to CRT-P or not).

Results

Sixty-six patients (53% male, 26% coronary artery disease) on primary prevention were followed for a median of 129 months [IQR: 101-155] after implantation. 27 (41%) patients were downgraded to CRT-P at GE after a median of 68 [IQR: 58-98] months (LVEF 54% ± 4%). The other 39 (59%) continued with CRT-D therapy (LVEF 52% ± 6%). No cardiac death or significant arrhythmia occurred in the CRT-P group (median follow-up (FU) 38 months [IQR: 29-53]). Three appropriate ICD-therapies occurred in the CRT-D group [median FU 70 months (IQR: 39-97)]. Annualized event-rates after DG/GE were 1.5%/year and 1.0%/year in the CRT-D group and the whole cohort, respectively.

Conclusions

No significant tachyarrhythmia were detected in the patients downgraded to CRT-P during follow-up. However, three events were observed in the CRT-D group. Whilst downgrading CRT-D patients is an option, a small residual risk for arrhythmic events remains and decisions regarding downgrade should be made on a case-by-case basis.

MAgnetic resonance imaging based DUal lead cardiac Resynchronization therapy: A prospectIve Left Bundle Branch Pacing Study (MADURAI LBBP study)

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy(CRT) is a class-I indication for LVEF≤35%, and heart failure(HF). LBBB associated nonischemic-cardiomyopathy (LB-NICM) with minimal or no scar by cardiac-magnetic-resonance(CMR) imaging may be associated with excellent prognosis following CRT. Left-bundle-branch-pacing(LBBP) can achieve excellent resynchronization in LBBB patients.

OBJECTIVES

Aim of our study was to prospectively assess feasibility and efficacy of LBBP with or without a defibrillator in patients with LB-NICM and LVEF ≤35%, risk stratified by CMR.

METHODS

Pts with LB-NICM, LVEF≤35% and HF were prospectively enrolled from 2019 to 2022. If the scar burden<10% by CMR, LBBP only (Group-I) and if ≥10%, LBBP+ICD(Group-II) was performed. Primary endpoints-1.Echocardiographic-response(ER)- ΔLVEF ≥15% at 6 months; 2.Composite of time to death, HFH or sustained VT/VF. Secondary endpoints-1.Echocardiographic-hyper-response(EHR-LVEF≥50%orΔLVEF ≥20%) at 6 and 12 months; 2.Indication for ICD-upgradation(persistent LVEF<35% at 12 months or sustained VT/VF) RESULTS: 120 patients were enrolled. CMR showed <10% scar-burden in 109 patients(90.8%). 4 patients opted for LBBP+ICD and withdrew. LBBP optimized-dual-chamber-pacemaker(LOT-DDD-P) was done in 101 patients and LOT-CRT-P in 4 patients(Group-I,n=105). Scar-burden ≥10% in 11 pts who underwent LBBP+ICD(Group-II). During mean-follow-up 21±12 months, primary endpoint of ER observed in 80%(68/85 pts) in Group-I vs 27%(3/11 pts) in Group-II(p-0.0001). Primary composite-endpoint of death,HFH or VT/VF occurred in 3.8% in group-I vs 33.3% in Group-II(p<0.0001). Secondary endpoint of EHR(LVEF≥50%) observed in 39.5%vs0%, 61.2%vs9.1% and 80%vs33.3% at 3, 6 and 12 months in group-I and group-II respectively.

CONCLUSION

CMR guided CRT using LOT-DDD-P appears to be a safe and feasible approach in LB-NICM and has the potential to reduce healthcare cost.

Long-term outcomes in nonprogressors to cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Among patients with heart failure undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), patients with a minimal change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have recently been defined as "nonprogressors" rather than as "nonresponders." Little is known regarding long-term outcomes of nonprogressors.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate outcomes in patients undergoing CRT on the basis of echocardiographically determined response status.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical charts of patients with an LVEF of ≤35% and a QRS duration of ≥120 ms undergoing CRT at the Cleveland Clinic, Johns Hopkins Hospital, and Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center between 2003 and 2014. Response to CRT was defined on the basis of LVEF change as follows: super-responders ≥20%, responders 6%-19%, nonprogressors 0%-5%, and progressors <0%. Survival free of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation and heart transplantation was compared on the basis of response classification.

RESULTS

A total of 1058 patients were included and had a mean follow-up 8.7 ± 5.4 years, over which time there were 606 end points (37 LVAD implants, 32 heart transplants, and 537 deaths). Survival free of LVAD and heart transplant differed significantly between response groups after CRT both in the mid-term (4 years) and in the long-term (8.7 ± 5.4 years), with super-responders achieving the best outcomes and progressors the worst (P < .001). In multivariate analysis, nonprogressors had superior outcomes to progressors (P = .02) at 4 years of follow-up. Over the duration of follow-up (8.7 ± 5.4 years), there was no significant difference in survival between those 2 groups (P = .18).

CONCLUSION

Nonprogressors to CRT have superior medium-term outcomes but similar long-term outcomes to progressors and inferior outcomes to responders and super-responders.

Leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Leadless left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a novel procedure for treatment of patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. Current evidence is limited to observational studies with small patient numbers.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy of leadless LV endocardial pacing.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted through PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Mean differences (MDs) in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline to 6 months postprocedure were combined using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Cochrane Q test, I2, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis. Funnel plots were constructed to detect publication bias.

RESULTS

Five studies with 181 patients were included in the final analysis. Procedural success rate was 90.6%. Clinical response rate was 63%, with mean improvement in NYHA functional class of 0.43 (MD -0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.76 to -0.1; P = .01), with high heterogeneity (P <.001; I2 = 81.1%). There was a mean increase in LVEF of 6.3% (MD 6.3; 95% CI 4.35-8.19; P <.001, with low heterogeneity (P = 0.84; I2 <0.001%). The echocardiographic response rate was 54%. Procedure-related complication and mortality rates were 23.8% and 2.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of leadless LV endocardial pacing for CRT supports its use as a second-line therapy in patients in whom standard CRT is not possible or has been ineffective. Improvements in safety profile will facilitate widespread uptake in the treatment of these patients.

Clinical and gated SPECT MPI parameters associated with super-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

PURPOSE

We sought to evaluate the behavior of cardiac mechanical synchrony as measured by phase SD (PSD) derived from gated MPI SPECT (gSPECT) in patients with super-response after CRT and to evaluate the clinical and imaging characteristics associated with super-response.

METHODS

158 subjects were evaluated with gSPECT before and 6 months after CRT. Patients with an improvement of LVEF > 15% and NYHA class I/II or reduction in LV end-systolic volume > 30% and NYHA class I/II were labeled as super-responders (SR).

RESULTS

34 patients were classified as super-responders (22%) and had lower PSD (32° ± 17°) at 6 months after CRT compared to responders (45° ± 24°) and non-responders 46° ± 28° (P = .02 for both comparisons). Regression analysis identified predictors independently associated with super-response to CRT: absence of previous history of CAD (odds ratio 18.7; P = .002), absence of diabetes mellitus (odds ratio 13; P = .03), and history of hypertension (odds ratio .2; P = .01).

CONCLUSION

LV dyssynchrony after CRT implantation, but not at baseline, was significantly better among super-responders compared to non-super-responders. The absence of diabetes, absence of CAD, and history of hypertension were independently associated with super-response after CRT.

Downgrade of cardiac defibrillator devices to pacemakers in elderly heart failure patients: clinical considerations and the importance of shared decision-making

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators are implanted on a large scale in patients with heart failure (HF) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death. There are different scenarios in which defibrillator therapy is no longer desired or indicated, and this is occurring increasingly in elderly patients. Usually device therapy is continued until the device has reached battery depletion. At that time, the decision needs to be made to either replace it or to downgrade to a pacing-only device. This decision is dependent on many factors, including the vitality of the patient and his/her preferences, but may also be influenced by changes in recommendations in guidelines. In the last few years, there has been an increased awareness that discussions around these decisions are important and useful. Advanced care planning and shared decision-making have become important and are increasingly recognised as such. In this short review we describe six elderly patients with HF, in whose cases we discussed these issues, and we aim to provide some scientific and ethical rationale for clinical decision-making in this context. Current guidelines advocate the discussion of end-of-life options at the time of device implantation, and physicians should realise that their choices influence patients’ options in this critical phase of their illness.

Remote Hemodynamic-Guided Therapy of Patients With Recurrent Heart Failure Following Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background

Patients with recurring heart failure (HF) following cardiac resynchronization therapy fare poorly. Their management is undecided. We tested remote hemodynamic‐guided pharmacotherapy.

Methods and Results

We evaluated cardiac resynchronization therapy subjects included in the CHAMPION (CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in New York Heart Association Class III Heart Failure Patients) trial, which randomized patients with persistent New York Heart Association Class III symptoms and ≥1 HF hospitalization in the previous 12 months to remotely managed pulmonary artery (PA) pressure‐guided management (treatment) or usual HF care (control). Diuretics and/or vasodilators were adjusted conventionally in control and included remote PA pressure information in treatment. Annualized HF hospitalization rates, changes in PA pressures over time (analyzed by area under the curve), changes in medications, and quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores) were assessed. Patients who had cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=190, median implant duration 755 days) at enrollment had poor hemodynamic function (cardiac index 2.00±0.59 L/min per m²), high comorbidity burden (67% had secondary pulmonary hypertension, 61% had estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m²), and poor Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores (57±24). During 18 months randomized follow‐up, HF hospitalizations were 30% lower in treatment (n=91, 62 events, 0.46 events/patient‐year) versus control patients (n=99, 93 events, 0.68 events/patient‐year) (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51–0.96; P=0.028). Treatment patients had more medication up‐/down‐titrations (847 versus 346 in control, P<0.001), mean PA pressure reduction (area under the curve −413.2±123.5 versus 60.1±88.0 in control, P=0.002), and quality of life improvement (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire decreased −13.5±23 versus −4.9±24.8 in control, P=0.006).

Conclusions

Remote hemodynamic‐guided adjustment of medical therapies decreased PA pressures and the burden of HF symptoms and hospitalizations in patients with recurring Class III HF and hospitalizations, beyond the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00531661.

Ongoing Risk of Ventricular Arrhythmias and All-Cause Mortality at Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Generator Change: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

[Figure: see text].

Risk of ventricular arrhythmia in cardiac resynchronization therapy responders and super-responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is associated with improved survival, and reduction in heart failure hospitalization, and ventricular arrhythmia (VA) risk. However, the impact of CRT super-response [CRT-SR, increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) to ≥ 50%] on VA remains unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We undertook a meta-analysis aimed at determining the impact of CRT response and CRT-SR on risk of VA and all-cause mortality. Systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, identifying all relevant English articles published until 31 December 2019. A total of 34 studies (7605 patients for VA and 5874 patients for all-cause mortality) were retained for the meta-analysis. The pooled cumulative incidence of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy for VA was significantly lower at 13.0% (4.5% per annum) in CRT-responders, vs. 29.0% (annualized rate of 10.0%) in CRT non-responders, relative risk (RR) 0.47 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.56, P < 0.0001]; all-cause mortality 3.5% vs. 9.1% per annum, RR of 0.38 (95% CI 0.30-0.49, P < 0.0001). The pooled incidence of VA was significantly lower in CRT-SR compared with CRT non-super-responders (non-responders + responders) at 0.9% vs. 3.8% per annum, respectively, RR 0.22 (95% CI 0.12-0.40, P < 0.0001); as well as all-cause mortality at 2.0% vs. 4.3%, respectively, RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.33-0.66, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac resynchronization therapy super-responders have low absolute risk of VA and all-cause mortality. However, there remains a non-trivial residual absolute risk of these adverse outcomes in CRT responders. These findings suggest that among CRT responders, there may be a continued clinical benefit of defibrillators.

Cardiac electrical and mechanical synchrony of super-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Super-responders (SRs) to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) regain near-normal or normal cardiac function. The extent of cardiac synchrony of SRs and whether continuous biventricular (BIV) pacing is needed remain unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cardiac electrical and mechanical synchrony of SRs.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed CRT recipients between 2008 and 2016 in 2 centers to identify SRs, whose left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction was increased to ≥50% at follow-up. Cardiac synchrony was evaluated in intrinsic and BIV-paced rhythms. Electrical synchrony was estimated by QRS duration and LV mechanical synchrony by single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging.

RESULTS

Seventeen SRs were included with LV ejection fraction increased from 33.0 ± 4.6% to 59.3 ± 6.3%. The intrinsic QRS duration after super-response was 148.8 ± 30.0 ms, significantly shorter than baseline (174.8 ± 11.9 ms, P = 0.004, t = -3.379) but longer than BIV-paced level (135.5 ± 16.7 ms, P = 0.042, t = 2.211). Intrinsic LV mechanical synchrony significantly improved after super-response (phase standard deviation [PSD], 51.1 ± 16.5° vs. 19.8 ± 8.1°, P < 0.001, t = 5.726; phase histogram bandwidth (PHB), 171.7 ± 64.2° vs. 60.5 ± 22.9°, P < 0.001, t = 5.376) but was inferior to BIV-paced synchrony (PSD, 19.8 ± 8.1° vs. 15.2 ± 6.4°, P = 0.005, t = 3.414; PHB, 60.5 ± 22.9° vs. 46.0 ± 16.3°, P = 0.009, t = 3.136).

CONCLUSIONS

SRs had significant improvements in cardiac electrical and LV mechanical synchrony. Since intrinsic synchrony of SRs was still inferior to BIV-paced rhythm, continued BIV pacing is needed to maintain longstanding and synchronized contraction.

Mid-term feasibility and safety of downgrade procedure from defibrillator to pacemaker with cardiac resynchronization therapy

Backgrounds

Some patients who undergo implantation of cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) survive long enough, thus requiring CRT-D battery replacement. Defibrillator therapy might become unnecessary in patients who have had significant clinical improvement and recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after CRT-D implantation.

Methods

Forty-nine patients who needed replacement of a CRT-D battery were considered for exchange of CRT-D for cardiac resynchronization therapy with pacemaker (CRT-P) if they met the following criteria: LVEF >45%; the indication for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator was primary prevention at initial implantation and no appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy was documented after initial implantation of the CRT-D.

Results

Seven patients (14.2%) were undergone a downgrade from CRT-D to CRT-P without any complications. No ventricular tachyarrhythmic events were observed during a mean follow-up of 39.7 ± 21.1 months and there was no significant change in LVEF between before and 1 year after device replacement (53.5% ± 6.2% vs. 56.4% ± 7.3%, P = 0.197).

Conclusions

This study confirmed mid-term feasibility and safety of downgrade from CRT-D to CRT-P alternative to conventional replacement with CRT-D.

•

Downgrade from CRT-D to CRT-P is feasible for patients with improved LVEF of >45%.

•

Patients without VT/VF after initial CRT-D implantation are suitable for downgrade.

•

Patients had no ventricular arrhythmias or HF hospitalization after the downgrade.

Current role of echocardiography in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment for patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Patients are usually assessed by echocardiography, which provides a number of anatomical and functional information used for cardiac dyssynchrony assessment, prognostic stratification, identification of the optimal site of pacing in the left ventricle, optimization of the CRT device, and patient follow-up. Compared to other cardiac imaging techniques, echocardiography has the advantage to be non-invasive, repeatable, and safe, without exposure to ionizing radiation or nefrotoxic contrast. In this article, we review current evidence about the role of echocardiography before, during, and after the implantation of a CRT device.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device replacement considerations: upgrade or downgrade? A complex decision in the current clinical setting

There are limited data about the management of patients presenting for elective generator replacements in the setting of previously implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices that are nearing end-of-life. The individual patient's clinical status and concomitant morbidities may evolve so that considerations may include not only replacement of the pulse generator, but also potentially changing the type of device [e.g. downgrading CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) to CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) or ICD or upgrading of CRT-P to CRT-D]. Moreover, the clinical evidence for CRT-D/CRT-P implantation may change over time, with ongoing research and availability of new trial data. In this review we discuss the ethical, clinical and financial implications related to CRT generator replacements and the need for additional clinical trials to better understand which patients should undergo CRT device downgrading or upgrading at the time of battery depletion.

Meta-analysis of Risk of Ventricular Arrhythmias After Improvement in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction During Follow-Up in Patients With Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death in patients with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, there are limited data on the long-term benefit of ICD therapy in patients whose LVEF subsequently improves. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of LVEF improvement on ICD therapy during follow-up. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects modeling. Sixteen studies with 3,959 patients were included in our analysis. Study arms were defined by LVEF improvement at follow-up (improved LVEF [>35%]: 1,622; low LVEF [≤35%] 2,337). Mean age (64.8 vs 64.9 years, p = 0.97) was similar, whereas men were overrepresented in the persistent low LVEF group (79% vs 72%, p <0.001). Appropriate ICD therapy rate was 9.7% (improved LVEF) versus 21.8% (low LVEF) over a median follow-up period of 2.9 years. In the meta-analysis, improved LVEF group had significantly lower (3.3% vs 7.2% per year IRR 0.52; CI 0.38 to 0.70; p <0.001) appropriate ICD therapies which was uniformly seen across all subgroups (ICD-only studies: IRR 0.59; p = 0.004) (cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator-only studies: IRR 0.31; p = 0.002) (super-responder studies [mean LVEF > 45%]: IRR 0.53; p = 0.002). Inappropriate ICD therapy rates were, however, similar in both groups (3.01% vs 2.56% per year IRR 0.76; CI 0.43 to 1.36; p = 0.35). All-cause mortality rates in our meta-analysis favored (3.63% vs 8.23% per year IRR 0.49; CI 0.35 to 0.69; p <0.001) the improved LVEF group. In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that an improvement in LVEF is associated with a significantly reduced risk of ventricular arrhythmia and mortality. However, inappropriate ICD therapy rates remain similar.

Predictors and long-term outcome of super-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

The level of improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in super-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is exceptional. However, the long-term prognosis remains unknown in a large population.

HYPOTHESIS

Whether super-responders haven good long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We registered 347 patients with primary CRT-D indication. Super-response was defined by LVEF >50% at follow-up echocardiogram. Best-subset regression analysis identified predictors of super-response. Endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE; eg, all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization, cardiac death, and appropriate ICD therapy).

RESULTS

Fifty-six (16%) patients with LVEF >50% were classified as super-responders. Female sex (OR: 3.06, 95% CI: 1.54-6.05), nonischemic etiology (OR: 2.70, 95% CI: 1.29-5.68), higher LVEF at baseline (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), and wider QRS duration (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.04-1.32) were predictors of super-response. Cumulative incidence of MACE at a median of 5.3 years was 18% in super-responders, 22% in responders, and 51% in nonresponders (P < 0.001). None of super responders died from cardiac death, compared to 9% of responders and 25% of non-responders (P < 0.001). None of super-responders experienced appropriate ICD therapy, compared with 10% of responders and 21% of non-responders (P < 0.001). In super-responders, the adjusted hazard ratio was 0.37 (95% CI: 0.19-0.73) for MACE and 0.44 (95% CI: 0.20-0.95) for total mortality, compared with non-responders.

CONCLUSIONS

Female sex, non-ischemic etiology, higher baseline LVEF, and wider QRS duration were independently associated with super-response. Super-response was associated with persistent excellent prognosis regarding survival and appropriate ICD therapy during long-term follow-up.

Echo response and clinical outcome in CRT patients

Background

Change in left ventricular end-systolic volume (∆LVESV) is the most frequently used surrogate marker in measuring response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT). We investigated whether ∆LVESV is the best measure to discriminate between a favourable and unfavourable outcome and whether this is equally applicable to non-ischaemic and ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

Methods

205 CRT patients (age 65 ± 12 years, 69 % men) were included. At baseline and 6 months echocardiographic studies, exercise testing and laboratory measurements were performed. CRT response was assessed by: ∆LVESV, ∆LV ejection fraction (LVEF), ∆ interventricular mechanical delay, ∆VO₂ peak, ∆VE/VCO₂, ∆BNP, ∆creatinine, ∆NYHA, and ∆QRS. These were correlated to the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between 6 and 24 months.

Results

MACE occurred in 19 % of the patients (non-ischaemic: 13 %, ischaemic: 24 %). ∆LVESV remained the only surrogate marker for CRT response for the total population and patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, showing areas under the curve (AUC) of 0.69 and 0.850, respectively. For ischaemic cardiomyopathy, ∆BNP was the best surrogate marker showing an AUC of 0.66.

Conclusion

∆LVESV is an excellent surrogate marker measuring CRT response concerning long-term outcome for non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy. ∆LVESV is not suitable for ischaemic cardiomyopathy in which measuring CRT response remains difficult.

Association of apical rocking with super-response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy

Background

Super-responders to cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) show an exceptional improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Previous studies showed that apical rocking was independently associated with echocardiographic response to CRT. However, little is known about the association between apical rocking and super-response to CRT.

Objectives

To determine the independent association of LV apical rocking with super-response to CRT in a large cohort.

Methods

A cohort of 297 consecutive heart failure patients treated with primary indication for CRT-D were included in an observational registry. Apical rocking was defined as motion of the left ventricular (LV) apical myocardium perpendicular to the LV long axis. ‘Super-response’ was defined by the top quartile of LVEF response based on change from baseline to follow-up echocardiogram. Best-subset regression analysis identified predictors of LVEF super-response to CRT.

Results

Apical rocking was present in 45 % of patients. Super-responders had an absolute mean LVEF increase of 27 % (LVEF 22.0 % ± 5.7 at baseline and 49.0 % ± 7.5 at follow-up). Apical rocking was significantly more common in super-responders compared with non-super-responders (76 and 34 %, P < 0.001). In univariate analysis, female gender (OR 2.39, 95 % CI 1.38–4.11), lower LVEF at baseline (OR 0.91 95 % CI 0.87–0.95), non-ischaemic aetiology (OR 4.15, 95 % CI 2.33–7.39) and apical rocking (OR 6.19, 95 % CI 3.40–11.25) were associated with super-response. In multivariate analysis, apical rocking was still strongly associated with super-response (OR 5.82, 95 % CI 2.68–12.61). Super-responders showed an excellent clinical prognosis with a very low incidence of heart failure admission, cardiac mortality and appropriate ICD therapy.

Conclusion

Apical rocking is independently associated with super-response to CRT.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12471-015-0768-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reduced appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy after cardiac resynchronization therapy-induced left ventricular function recovery: a meta-analysis and systematic review

AIMS

For patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD; CRT-D), the effect of an improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on appropriate ICD therapy may have significant implications regarding management at the time of ICD generator replacement.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the effect of LVEF recovery following CRT on the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy. A search of multiple electronic databases identified 709 reports, of which 6 retrospective cohort studies were included (n = 1740). In patients with post-CRT LVEF ≥35% (study n = 4), the pooled estimated rate of ICD therapy (5.5/100 person-years) was significantly lower than patients with post-CRT LVEF <35% [incidence rate difference (IRD): -6.5/100 person-years, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -8.8 to -4.2, P < 0.001]. Similarly, patients with post-CRT LVEF ≥45% (study n = 4) demonstrated lower estimated rates of ICD therapy (2.3/100 person-years) compared with patients without such recovery (IRD: -5.8/100 person-years, 95% CI: -7.6 to -4.0, P < 0.001). Restricting analysis to studies discounting ICD therapies during LVEF recovery (study n = 3), patients with LVEF recovery (≥35 or ≥45%) had significantly lower rates of ICD therapy compared with patients without such recovery (P for both <0.001). Patients with primary prevention indication for ICD, regardless of LVEF recovery definition, had very low rates of ICD therapy (0.4 to 0.8/100-person years).

CONCLUSION

Recovery of LVEF post-CRT is associated with significantly reduced appropriate ICD therapy. Patients with improvement of LVEF ≥45% and those with primary prevention indication for ICD appear to be at lowest risk.

Appropriateness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators at the time of generator replacement: are indications still met?

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine how often patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) meet guideline-derived indications at the time of generator replacement.

BACKGROUND

Professional societies have developed guideline criteria for the appropriate implantation of an ICD for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. It is unknown whether patients continue to meet criteria when their devices need replacement for battery depletion.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients undergoing replacement of primary prevention ICDs at 2 tertiary Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Indications for continued ICD therapy at the time of generator replacement included a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% or receipt of appropriate device therapy.

RESULTS

In our cohort of 231 patients, 59 (26%) no longer met guideline-driven indications for an ICD at the time of generator replacement. An additional 79 patients (34%) had not received any appropriate ICD therapies and had not undergone reassessment of their LVEF. Patients with an initial LVEF of 30% to 35% were less likely to meet indications for ICD therapy at the time of replacement (odds ratio: 0.52; 95% confidence interval: 0.30 to 0.88; p = 0.01). Patients without ICD indications subsequently received appropriate ICD therapies at a significantly lower rate than patients with indications (2.8% vs. 10.7% annually, p < 0.001). If ICD generator explantations were performed instead of replacements in the patients without ICD indications, the cost savings would be $1.6 million.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 25% of patients who receive primary prevention ICDs may no longer meet guideline indications for ICD use at the time of generator replacement, and these patients receive subsequent ICD therapies at a significantly lower rate.

Long-term outcome of 'super-responder' patients to cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

To evaluate the long-term changes of clinical and echocardiographic parameters, the incidence of cardiac events and parameters associated with late cardiac events in 'super-responders' to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with [CRT defibrillator (CRT-D)] or without defibrillator back-up.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In all consecutive patients treated with CRT in two Italian centres (Trieste and Udine) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤0.35 at implantation (Timp) and LVEF > 0.50 1 and/or 2 years (Tnorm) after implantation, the long-term outcome and the evolution of echocardiographic parameters were assessed; factors associated with a higher risk of cardiac events, defined as hospitalization or death for heart failure (HF), sudden death, or CRT-D appropriate interventions, were also analysed. Among the 259 patients evaluated, 62 (24%) had LVEF ≥ 0.50 at Tnorm (n = 44 with at 1 year, n = 18 at 2 years). During a mean follow-up of 68 ± 30 months, one cardiac death (for HF) and eight cardiovascular events (two hospitalization for HF and six appropriate CRT-D interventions) occurred. At the last echo evaluation (Tfup) performed 51 ± 26 months after Timp, LVEF was <0.50 in five patients (>0.45 in four of them). At univariable analysis, only LV end-systolic volume evaluated at Tfup was associated with a higher risk of cardiac events during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In 'super-responders' to CRT long-term outcome is excellent. However, cardiac events, mainly CRT-D appropriate interventions, can occur despite the persistence of LVEF > 0.50. Early identification of these patients is still an unsolved issue.