Left Ventricular Lead Electrical Delay Is a Predictor of Mortality in Patients With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Left ventricular electrical delay predicts volumetric response to leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Leadless left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing is an emerging cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) technology. Predictors of response to leadless CRT are poorly understood. Implanting the LV endocardial pacing electrode in sites with increased electrical latency (Q-LV) may improve response rates.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between Q-LV and echocardiographic remodeling response to leadless CRT delivered with the WiSE-CRT system.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis (n = 122) of the SOLVE-CRT trial examined the relationship between LV pacing site Q-LV with rate of left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) reduction >15% at 6 months. Multivariable regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex, previous CRT nonresponse, cardiomyopathy etiology, QRS morphology, and QRS duration was performed, followed by receiver operating characteristic analysis and analysis of variance by Q-LV quartile. A subgroup analysis of the ischemic cardiomyopathy cohort was undertaken.

RESULTS

Complete Q-LV data were available for 122 of 153 patients (80%) in the active arms SOLVE-CRT. Overall, the 6-month LVESV response rate was 46%. Logistic regression identified Q-LV as an independent response predictor with borderline significance (adjusted odds ratio 1.015; P = .05). Analysis by Q-LV quartile demonstrated a significant improvement in response rate in quartile 4 (longest Q-LV 64%) compared to quartile 1 (shortest Q-LV 28%) (P <.01). This association was primarily driven by strong Q-LV-response correlation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, demonstrated by subgroup logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio 1.034; P = .004).

CONCLUSION

Increased Q-LV was associated with improved reverse remodeling following leadless CRT. Targeting LV endocardial sites of high Q-LV may deliver additional benefit compared to empirical LV electrode implantation.

Location, Location, Location: A Pilot Study to Compare Electrical with Echocardiographic-Guided Targeting of Left Ventricular Lead Placement in Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy

Introduction: Cardiac resynchronisation therapy is ineffective in 30-40% of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Targeting non-scarred myocardium by selecting the site of latest mechanical activation using echocardiography has been suggested to improve outcomes but at the cost of increased resource utilisation. The interval between the beginning of the QRS complex and the local LV lead electrogram (QLV) might represent an alternative electrical marker. Aims: To determine whether the site of latest myocardial electrical and mechanical activation are concordant. Methods: This was a single-centre, prospective pilot study, enrolling patients between March 2019 and June 2021. Patients underwent speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) prior to CRT implantation. Intra-procedural QLV measurement and R-wave amplitude were performed in a blinded fashion at all accessible coronary sinus branches. Pearson's correlation coefficient and Cohen's Kappa coefficient were utilised for the comparison of electrical and echocardiographic parameters. Results: A total of 20 subjects had complete data sets. In 15, there was a concordance at the optimal site between the electrically targeted region and the mechanically targeted region; in four, the regions were adjacent (within one segment). There was discordance (≥2 segments away) in only one case between the two methods of targeting. There was a statistically significant increase in procedure time and fluoroscopy duration using the intraprocedural QLV strategy. There was no statistical correlation between the quantitative electrical and echocardiographic data. Conclusions: A QLV-guided approach to targeting LV lead placement appears to be a potential alternative to the established echocardiographic-guided technique. However, it is associated with prolonged fluoroscopy and overall procedure time.

Cardiac resynchronization using fusion pacing during exercise

INTRODUCTION

Fusion pacing requires correct timing of left ventricular pacing to right ventricular activation, although it is unclear whether this is maintained when atrioventricular (AV) conduction changes during exercise. We used cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to compare cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using fusion pacing or fixed AV delays (AVD).

METHODS

Patients 6 months post-CRT implant with PR intervals < 250 ms performed two CPET tests, using either the SyncAV™ algorithm or fixed AVD of 120 ms in a double-blinded, randomized, crossover study. All other programming was optimized to produce the narrowest QRS duration (QRSd) possible.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (11 male, age 71 [65-77] years) were recruited. Fixed AVD and fusion programming resulted in similar narrowing of QRSd from intrinsic rhythm at rest (p = .85). Overall, there was no difference in peak oxygen consumption (V̇O2 PEAK , p = .19), oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold (VT1, p = .42), or in the time to reach either V̇O2 PEAK (p = .81) or VT1 (p = .39). The BORG rating of perceived exertion was similar between groups. CPET performance was also analyzed comparing whichever programming gave the narrowest QRSd at rest (119 [96-136] vs. 134 [119-142] ms, p < .01). QRSd during exercise (p = .03), peak O2 pulse (mL/beat, a surrogate of stroke volume, p = .03), and cardiac efficiency (watts/mL/kg/min, p = .04) were significantly improved.

CONCLUSION

Fusion pacing is maintained during exercise without impairing exercise capacity compared with fixed AVD. However, using whichever algorithm gives the narrowest QRSd at rest is associated with a narrower QRSd during exercise, higher peak stroke volume, and improved cardiac efficiency.

Beyond Conventional Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: A Review of Electrophysiological Options in the Management of Chronic Heart Failure

The incidence of heart failure (HF) continues to grow and burden our health care system. Electrophysiological aberrations are common amongst patients with heart failure and can contribute to worsening symptoms and prognosis. Targeting these abnormalities with cardiac and extra-cardiac device therapies and catheter ablation procedures augments cardiac function. Newer technologies aimed to improvement procedural outcomes, address known procedural limitations and target newer anatomical sites have been trialled recently. We review the role and evidence base for conventional cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) and its optimisation, catheter ablation therapies for atrial arrhythmias, cardiac contractility and autonomic modulation therapies.

Inadvertent QRS prolongation by an optimization device-based algorithm in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background

Device-based algorithms offer the potential for automated optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but the process for accepting them into clinical use is currently still ad-hoc, rather than based on pre-clinical and clinical testing of specific features of validity. We investigated how the QuickOpt-guided VV delay (VVD) programming performs against the clinical and engineering heuristic of QRS complex shortening by CRT.

Methods

A prospective, 2-center study enrolled 37 consecutive patients with CRT. QRS complex duration (QRSd) was assessed during intrinsic atrioventricular conduction, synchronous biventricular pacing, and biventricular pacing with QuickOpt-proposed VVD. The measurements were done manually by electronic calipers in signal-averaged and magnified 12-lead QRS complexes.

Results

Native QRSd was 174 ± 22 ms. Biventricular pacing with empiric AVD and synchronous VVD resulted in QRSd 156 ± 20 ms, a significant narrowing from the baseline QRSd by 17 ± 27 ms, P = 0.0003. In 36 of 37 patients, the QuickOpt algorithm recommended left ventricular preexcitation with VVD of 42 ± 18 ms (median 40 ms; interquartile range 30–55 ms, P <0.00001). QRSd in biventricular pacing with QuickOpt-based VVD was significantly longer compared with synchronous biventricular pacing (168 ± 25 ms vs. 156 ± 20 ms; difference 12 ± 11ms; P <0.00001). This prolongation correlated with the absolute VVD value (R = 0.66, P <0.00001).

Conclusions

QuickOpt algorithm systematically favours a left-preexcitation VVD which translates into a significant prolongation of the QRSd compared to synchronous biventricular pacing. There is no reason to believe that a manipulation that systematically widens QRSd should be considered to optimize physiology. Device-based CRT optimization algorithms should undergo systematic mechanistic pre-clinical evaluation in various scenarios before they are tested in large clinical studies.

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.

What Have We Learned in the Last 20 Years About CRT Non-Responders?

Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has become well established in the treatment of heart failure, the management of patients who do not respond after CRT remains a key challenge. This review will summarize what we have learned about non-responders over the last 20 years and discuss methods for optimizing response, including the introduction of novel therapies.

Role of Electrical Delay in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response

Traditionally, left ventricular (LV) lead position was guided by anatomic criteria of pacing from the lateral wall of the LV. However, large trials showed little effect of LV lead position on outcomes, other than noting worse outcomes with apical positions. Given the poor correlation of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) outcomes with anatomically guided LV lead placement, focus shifted toward more physiologic predictors such as targeting the areas of delayed mechanical and electrical activation. Measures of left ventricular delay and interventricular delay are strong predictors of CRT response.

Novel active fixation lead guided by electrical delay can improve response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure

AIMS

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for heart failure (HF) recently has shown optimal results by targeting electrically delayed sites in coronary sinus (CS) branches. However this purpose often cannot be reached because of unstable left ventricular (LV) lead position. In current study were assessed the long-term effects of the novel active fixation LV lead in CS, guided by electrical delay (QLV), in patients with HF due to coronary artery disease.

METHODS

One hundred eighty-five consecutive patients underwent CRT with intraoperative evaluation of QLV in the target position of the LV lead. When the novel active fixation LV lead was available, 98 consecutive patients received it, composing the Fix group. They were compared with 87 patients with a conventional passive fixation lead (No Fix group). The final LV lead position was assessed by fluoroscopy. Clinical response to CRT was assessed within a period of about 3 years: patients experiencing HF rehospitalization and death due to HF were defined as non-responders.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups in the final position of LV lead in left anterior oblique view (Pearson χ2  = 0.12; P = 0.73). In right anterior oblique view, a basal position was reached more in the Fix group (38%) than in the No Fix group (6.5%) (Pearson χ2  = 23.095; P < 0.001). QLV was significantly greater in the Fix group (122.6 ± 33.2 ms; SE = 3.6) than in the No Fix group (97.5 ± 37.8 ms; SE = 4.9) (t = 4.17; P < 0.001). Rehospitalizations for HF were 37 in the No Fix group and 14 in the Fix group. Deaths due to HF were 49 in the No Fix group and 18 in the Fix group. Survival analysis, assessed by Cox regression, showed that the Fix group had a better outcome both for HF rehospitalizations [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.25-0.9; P = 0.023] and death due to HF (HR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.31-0.97; P = 0.04) in comparison with the No Fix group. Adjustment for baseline characteristics by multivariate analysis showed that an active fixation lead in CS, as a covariate, was still significant both for HF rehospitalizations (HR 0.46; 95% CI = 0.24-0.88; P = 0.019) and for death due to HF (HR 0.5; 95% CI = 0.28-0.9; P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel active fixation LV lead allowed to target sites with greater QLV. Often maximum QLV was documented in basal segments, were stability of conventional passive fixation leads is not enough. Patients receiving it experienced less HF rehospitalizations and less death due to HF. Active fixation lead in CS guided by QLV can improve long-term prognosis in patients with HF due to coronary artery disease undergoing to CRT.

Improvement of electrical synchrony in cardiac resynchronization therapy using dynamic atrioventricular delay programming and multipoint pacing

BACKGROUND

Optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is often time-consuming and therefore underused in a clinical setting. Novel device-based algorithms aiming to simplify optimization include a dynamic atrioventricular delay (AVD) algorithm (SyncAV, Abbott) and multipoint pacing (MPP, Abbott). This study examines the acute effect of SyncAV and MPP on electrical synchrony in patients with newly and chronically implanted CRT devices.

METHODS

Patients with SyncAV and MPP enabled devices were prospectively enrolled during implant or scheduled follow-up. Blinded 12-lead electrocardiographic acute measurements of QRS duration (QRSd) were performed for intrinsic QRSd (Intrinsic), bi-ventricular pacing (BiV), MPP, BiV with SyncAV at default offset 50 ms (BiVSyncAV_def ), BiV with SyncAV at patient-specific optimised offset (BiVSyncAV_opt ), MPP with SyncAV at default offset 50 ms (MPPSyncAV_def ), and MPP with SyncAV at patient-specific optimised offset (MPPSyncAV_opt ).

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were enrolled. QRSd for Intrinsic, BiV, MPP, BiVSyncAV_def , BiVSyncAV_opt , MPPSyncAV_def , MPPSyncAV_opt were 160.4 ± 20.6 ms, 141.0 ± 20.5 ms, 130.2 ± 17.2 ms, 121.7 ± 20.9 ms, 117.0 ± 19.0 ms, 121.2 ± 17.1 ms, 108.7 ± 16.5 ms respectively. MPPSyncAV_opt led to greatest reduction of QRSd relative to Intrinsic (-31.6 ± 11.1%; p < .001), showed significantly shorter QRSd compared to all other pacing configurations (p < .001) and shortest QRSd in every patient. Shortening of QRSd was not significantly different between newly and chronically implanted devices (-51.6 ± 14.7 ms vs. -52.7 ± 21.9 ms; p = .99).

CONCLUSION

SyncAV and MPP improved acute electrical synchrony in CRT. Combining both technologies with patient-specific optimization resulted in greatest improvement, regardless of time since implantation. Whats new Novel device-based algorithms like a dynamic AVD algorithm (SyncAV, Abbott) and multipoint pacing (MPP, Abbott) aim to simplify CRT optimization. Our data show that a combination of patient tailored SyncAV optimization and MPP results in greatest improvement of electrical synchrony in CRT measured by QRS duration, regardless if programmed in newly or chronically implanted devices. This is the first study to our knowledge to examine a combination of these device-based algorithms. The results help understanding the ideal ventricular excitation in heart failure.

Simple electrophysiological predictor of QRS change induced by cardiac resynchronization therapy: A novel marker of complete left bundle branch block

BACKGROUND

QRS complex shortening by cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been associated with improved outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that the absence of QRS duration (QRSd) prolongation by right ventricular mid-septal pacing (RVP) may indicate complete left bundle branch block (cLBBB).

METHODS

We prospectively collected 12-lead surface electrocardiograms (ECGs) and intracardiac electrograms during CRT implant procedures. Digital recordings were edited and manually measured. The outcome measure was a change in QRSd induced by CRT (delta CRT). Several outcome predictors were investigated: native QRSd, cLBBB (by using Strauss criteria), interval between the onset of the QRS complex and the local left ventricular electrogram (Q-LV), and a newly proposed index defined by the difference between RVP and native QRSd (delta RVP).

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-three consecutive patients were included in the study. Delta RVP was 27 ± 25 ms, and delta CRT was -14 ± 28 ms. Delta CRT correlated with native QRSd (r = -0.65), with the presence of ECG-based cLBBB (r = -0.40), with Q-LV (r = -0.68), and with delta RVP (r = 0.72) (P < .00001 for all correlations). In multivariable analysis, delta CRT was most strongly associated with delta RVP (P < .00001), followed by native QRSd and Q-LV, while ECG-based cLBBB became a nonsignificant factor.

CONCLUSION

Baseline QRSd, delta RVP, and LV electrical lead position (Q-LV) represent strong independent predictors of ECG response to CRT. The absence of QRSd prolongation by RVP may serve as an alternative and more specific marker of cLBBB. Delta RVP correlates strongly with the CRT effect on QRSd and outperforms the predictive value of ECG-based cLBBB.

Contemporary ICD Use in Patients with Heart Failure

Despite constant breakthroughs in heart failure (HF) therapy, the population of HF patients resume to grow and is linked to increased mortality and morbidity. Ventricular arrhythmias (VA) are one of the leading causes of mortality in HF subjects. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are currently the gold standard in treatment, preventing arrhythmic sudden cardiac death (SCD) episodes. However, the death rates related to HF remain elevated, as not all HF subjects benefit equally. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as a novel approach for HF patients. These devices have been thoroughly investigated in major randomized controlled studies but continue to be underutilized in various countries. This review discusses the use of ICD in HF populations on top of treatments.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without defibrillation: a long-standing debate

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was shown to improve cardiac function, reduce heart failure hospitalizations, improve quality of life and prolong survival in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and intraventricular conduction disturbances, mainly left bundle branch block, on optimal medical therapy with ACE-inhibitors, β-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists up-titrated to maximum tolerated evidence-based doses. CRT can be achieved by means of pacemaker systems (CRT-P) or devices with defibrillation capabilities (CRT-D). CRT-Ds offer an undoubted advantage in the prevention of arrhythmic death, but such an advantage may be of lesser degree in non-ischemic heart failure aetiologies. Moreover, the higher CRT-D hardware complexity compared to CRT-P may predispose to device/lead malfunctions and the higher current drainage may cause a shorter battery duration with consequent premature replacements and the well-known incremental complications. In a period of financial constraints, also device costs should be carefully evaluated, with recent reports suggesting that CRT-Ps may be favoured over CRT-Ds in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and no prior history of cardiac arrhythmias from a cost-effectiveness point of view. The choice between a CRT-P or a CRT-D device should be patient-tailored whenever straightforward defibrillator indications are not present. The Goldenberg score may facilitate this decision-making process in ambiguous settings. Age, comorbidities, kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, advanced functional class, inappropriate therapy risk, implantable device infections and malfunctions are factors potentially reducing the expected benefit from defibrillating capabilities. Future prospective, randomized controlled trials are warranted to directly compare the efficacy and safety of CRT-Ps and CRT-Ds.

Left Ventricular Stimulation With Electrical Latency Predicts Mortality in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the prognostic value of the time interval from left ventricular (LV) pacing to the earliest onset of QRS complex (S-QRS) for long-term clinical outcomes in patients who underwent cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

BACKGROUND

The electrical latency during LV pacing evaluated by S-QRS is associated with local tissue property, and the S-QRS ≥37 ms has been previously proposed as an independent predictor of mechanical response to CRT.

METHODS

This study included 82 consecutive patients with heart failure with reduced LV ejection fraction (≤35%) and a wide QRS complex (≥120 ms) who underwent CRT. Patients were divided into a short S-QRS group (SS-QRS; <37 ms) and a long S-QRS group (LS-QRS; ≥37 ms). The primary endpoint was total mortality, including LV assist device implantation or heart transplantation, whereas the secondary endpoint was total mortality or HF hospitalization.

RESULTS

S-QRS was 25.9 ± 5.3 ms in SS-QRS and 51.5 ± 13.7 ms in LS-QRS (p < 0.01), and baseline QRS duration and electrical activation at the LV pacing site (i.e., Q-LV) were similar. During mean follow-up of 44.5 ± 21.1 months, 24 patients (29%) reached the primary endpoint, whereas the secondary endpoints were observed in 47 patients (57%). LS-QRS had significantly worse event-free survival for both endpoints. LS-QRS was an independent predictor of total mortality (hazard ratio: 2.6; 95% confidence interval: 1.11 to 6.12; p = 0.03) and the secondary composite events (hazard ratio: 2.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.31 to 4.33; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The S-QRS ≥37 ms at the LV pacing site was a significant predictor of total mortality and HF hospitalization. S-QRS-guided optimal LV lead placement is critical in patients who receive CRT.

Lateral left ventricular lead position is superior to posterior position in long-term outcome of patients who underwent cardiac resynchronization therapy

Aims

Preferring side branch of coronary sinus during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation has been empirical due to the limited data on the association of left ventricular (LV) lead position and long‐term clinical outcome. We evaluated the long‐term all‐cause mortality by LV lead non‐apical positions and further characterized them by interlead electrical delay (IED).

Methods and results

In our retrospective database, 2087 patients who underwent CRT implantation were registered between 2000 and 2018. Those with non‐apical LV lead locations were classified into anterior (n = 108), posterior (n = 643), and lateral (n = 1336) groups. All‐cause mortality was assessed by Kaplan–Meier and Cox analyses. Echocardiographic response was measured 6 months after CRT implantation. During the median follow‐up time of 3.7 years, 1150 (55.1%) patients died—710 (53.1%) with lateral, 78 (72.2%) with anterior, and 362 (56.3%) with posterior positions. When we investigated the risk of all‐cause mortality, there was a significantly lower rate of death in patients with lateral LV lead location when compared with those with an anterior (P < 0.01) or posterior (P < 0.01) position. Multivariate analysis after adjustment for relevant clinical covariates such as age, sex, ischaemic aetiology, left bundle branch block morphology, atrial fibrillation, and device type revealed consistent results that lateral position is associated with a significant risk reduction of all‐cause mortality when compared with anterior [hazard ratio 0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55–0.87; P < 0.01] or posterior (hazard ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.74–0.96; P < 0.01) position. When echocardiographic response was evaluated within the lateral group, patients with an IED longer than 110 ms (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.63; 95% CI 0.53–0.73; P = 0.012) showed 2.1 times higher odds of improvement in echocardiographic response 6 months after the implantation.

Conclusions

In this study, we proved in a real‐world patient population that after CRT implantation, lateral LV lead location was associated with long‐term mortality benefit and is superior to both anterior and posterior positions. Moreover, patients with this position showed the greatest echocardiographic response over 110 ms IED.

Time trends in sudden cardiac death risk in heart failure patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review

Aims

While data from randomized trials suggest a declining incidence of sudden cardiac death (SCD) among heart failure patients, the extent to which such a trend is present among patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has not been evaluated. We therefore assessed changes in SCD incidence, and associated factors, in CRT recipients over the last 20 years.

Methods and results

Literature search from inception to 30 April 2018 for observational and randomized studies involving CRT patients, with or without defibrillator, providing specific cause-of-death data. Sudden cardiac death was the primary endpoint. For each study, rate of SCD per 1000 patient-years of follow-up was calculated. Trend line graphs were subsequently constructed to assess change in SCD rates over time, which were further analysed by device type, patient characteristics, and medical therapy. Fifty-three studies, comprising 22 351 patients with 60 879 patient-years of follow-up and a total of 585 SCD, were included. There was a gradual decrease in SCD rates since the early 2000s in both randomized and observational studies, with rates falling more than four-fold. The rate of decline in SCD was steeper than that of all-cause mortality, and accordingly, the proportion of deaths which were due to SCD declined over the years. The magnitude of absolute decline in SCD was more prominent among CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) patients compared to those receiving CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D), with the difference in SCD rates between CRT-P and CRT-D decreasing considerably over time. There was a progressive increase in age, use of beta-blockers, and left ventricular ejection fraction, and conversely, a decrease in QRS duration and antiarrhythmic drug use.

Conclusion

Sudden cardiac death rates have progressively declined in the CRT heart failure population over time, with the difference between CRT-D vs. CRT-P recipients narrowing considerably.

Devices in Heart Failure Patients-Who Benefits From ICD and CRT?

Despite advances in heart failure treatment, this condition remains a relevant medical issue and is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. The cause of death in patients suffering from heart failure is not only a result of hemodynamic failure, but can also be due to ventricular arrhythmias. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are these days the only tool to significantly reduce arrhythmic sudden death; but not all patients benefit to the same extend. In addition, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is another tool which is used in patients suffering from heart fialure. Even though both devices have been investigated in large randomized trials, both ICD and CRT remain underutilized in many countries. This brief review focuses on various aspects in this regard including a short overview on upcoming device novelties in the near future.

CRT Optimization: What Is New? What Is Necessary?

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has proven to improve quality of life, reduce heart failure hospitalization, and prolong life in selected heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction, on optimal medical therapy and with electrical dyssynchrony. To ensure maximal benefit for CRT patients, optimization of care should be implemented. This begins with appropriate referring as well as selecting patients, knowing that the presence of left bundle branch block and QRS ≥ 150 ms is associated with the greatest reverse remodeling. The LV lead, preferably quadripolar, is best targeted in a postero-lateral position. After implantation, optimal device programming should aim for maximal biventricular pacing and in selected cases further electrical delay optimization might be of use. Even as important, is the implementation of thorough multidisciplinary heart failure care with medication uptitration, remote monitoring, rehabilitation, and patient education. The role of newer pacing strategies as endocardial or His-bundle pacing remains the subject of ongoing investigation.

Combination of left ventricular reverse remodeling and brain natriuretic peptide level at one year after cardiac resynchronization therapy predicts long-term clinical outcome

Introduction

The aim of this study was to investigate the predictors of long-term clinical outcome of heart failure (HF) patients who survived first year after initiation of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

Methods

This was a single-center observational cohort study of CRT patients implanted because of symptomatic HF with reduced ejection fraction between 2005 and 2013. Left ventricle (LV) diameters and ejection fraction, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and level of N-terminal fragment of pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were assessed at baseline and 12 months after CRT implantation. Their predictive power for long-term HF hospitalization and mortality, and cardiac and all-cause mortality was investigated.

Results

A total of 315 patients with left bundle branch block or intraventricular conduction delay who survived >1 year after CRT implantation were analyzed in the current study. During a follow-up period of 4.8±2.1 years from CRT implantation, 35.2% patients died from cardiac (19.3%) or non-cardiac (15.9%) causes. Post-CRT LV ejection fraction and LV end-systolic diameter (either 12-month value or the change from baseline) were equally predictive for clinical events. For NT-proBNP, however, the 12-month level was a stronger predictor than the change from baseline. Both reverse LV remodeling and 12-month level of NT-proBNP were independent and comparable predictors of CRT-related clinical outcome, while NT-proBNP response had the strongest association with all-cause mortality. When post-CRT relative change of LV end-systolic diameter and 12-month level of NT-proBNP (dichotomized at -12.3% and 1230 ng/L, respectively) were combined, subgroups of very-high and very-low risk patients were identified.

Conclusion

The level of NT-proBNP and reverse LV remodeling at one year after CRT are independent and complementary predictors of future clinical events. Their combination may help to improve the risk stratification of CRT patients.

Very long-term survival and late sudden cardiac death in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients

Aims

The very long-term outcome of patients who survive the first few years after receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has not been well described thus far. We aimed to provide long-term outcomes, especially with regard to the occurrence of sudden cardiac death (SCD), in CRT patients without (CRT-P) and with defibrillator (CRT-D).

Methods and results

A total of 1775 patients, with ischaemic or non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy, who were alive 5 years after CRT implantation, were enrolled in this multicentre European observational cohort study. Overall long-term mortality rates and specific causes of death were assessed, with a focus on late SCD. Over a mean follow-up of 30 months (interquartile range 10–42 months) beyond the first 5 years, we observed 473 deaths. The annual age-standardized mortality rates of CRT-D and CRT-P patients were 40.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 35.3–45.5] and 97.2 (95% CI 85.5–109.9) per 1000 patient-years, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 0.99 (95% CI 0.79–1.22). Twenty-nine patients in total died of late SCD (14 with CRT-P, 15 with CRT-D), corresponding to 6.1% of all causes of death in both device groups. Specific annual SCD rates were 8.5 and 5.8 per 1000 patient-years in CRT-P and CRT-D patients, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (adjusted HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.45–2.44). Death due to progressive heart failure represented the principal cause of death (42.8% in CRT-P patients and 52.6% among CRT-D recipients), whereas approximately one-third of deaths in both device groups were due to non-cardiovascular death.

Conclusion

In this first description of very long-term outcomes among CRT recipients, progressive heart failure death still represented the most frequent cause of death in patients surviving the first 5 years after CRT implant. In contrast, SCD represents a very low proportion of late mortality irrespective of the presence of a defibrillator.

Explanting Chronic Coronary Sinus Leads

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has become the gold standard for patients with systolic left ventricular function, left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%, wide complex QRS, and symptomatic heart failure. Annual implantation volume has steadily increased because of expanding indications for CRT. Improved survival resulted in many of these patients having their CRT devices for many years and eventually requiring an increased number of device-related procedures, including coronary sinus lead revisions and replacements following a coronary sinus lead extraction.

Ventricular electrical delay as a predictor of arrhythmias in patients with cardiac resynchronization implantable cardioverter defibrillator

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular (LV) remodeling and clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is inversely related to electrical dyssynchrony, measured as LV lead electrical delay (QLV). Presence of atrial or ventricular arrhythmia is correlated with worsening heart failure and LV remodeling.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the association of QLV with arrhythmic events in CRT recipients.

METHODS

We identified patients implanted with a CRT device at our center. QLV interval was measured and corrected for baseline QRS (cQLV). We performed multivariable Logistic regression to assess the effect of cQLV on the occurrence of atrial/ventricular arrhythmic events.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were included in analyses. The cQLV was significantly shorter in patients with atria tachycardia/supraventricular tachycardia (AT/SVT) events compared to patients without AT/SVT events (43.4 ± 22% vs. 60.3 ± 26.7%, p = .006). In contrast, no significant difference in cQLV was observed between patients with and without ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) events (46.2 ± 25.4% vs. 56 ± 25.7%, p = .13). cQLV was significantly shorter in patients with new onset AT/SVT events compared to those without (38.3 ± 22.2% vs. 55.7 ± 25.7%, p = .028). In contrast, no significant difference in cQLV was observed between patients with and without new onset VT/VF events (44.2 ± 25.2% vs. 56.3 ± 25.5%, p = .069). Following adjusted analyses, cQLV was a significant predictor of AT/SVT, but not for VT/VF.

CONCLUSION

cQLV is a simple measure that can identify a vulnerable cohort of CRT patients at increased risk for atrial tachyarrhythmias, and hence can predict reverse remodeling and clinical response to CRT treatment.

Novel approach to discriminate left bundle branch block from nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay using pacing-induced functional left bundle branch block

PURPOSE

Left bundle branch block (LBBB) has a predictive value for response to cardiac resynchronization therapy as reported by Zareba et al. (Circulation 123(10):1061-1072, 2011). However, based on ECG criteria, the discrimination between complete LBBB and nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay is challenging. We tested the hypothesis that discrimination can be performed using standard electrophysiological catheters and a simple stimulation protocol.

METHODS

Fifty-nine patients were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into groups of narrow QRS (n = 20), wide QRS of right bundle branch block (RBBB) morphology (n = 14), and wide QRS of LBBB morphology (n = 25). Using a diagnostic catheter placed in the coronary sinus, left ventricular activation was assessed during intrinsic conduction as well as during right ventricular (RV) stimulation.

RESULTS

In patients with narrow QRS and RBBB, the Q-LV/QRS ratio was 0.43 ± 0.013 (n = 20) and 0.41 ± 0.026 (n = 14), respectively. In patients with LBBB morphology, the Q-LV/QRS split up into a group of patients with normal (0.43 ± 0.022, n = 7) and a group with delayed left ventricular activation (0.75 ± 0.016, n = 18). By direct comparison of the Q-LV/QRS ratio during intrinsic conduction with the Q-LV/QRS ratio during RV pacing leading to a functional LBBB, a clear distinction between a group of "true LBBB" and another group of "apparent LBBB"/nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (NICD) could be generated.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a novel and practical method that might facilitate discrimination between patients with apparent LBBB and true LBBB by comparing Q-LV/QRS ratios during intrinsic activation and during RV stimulation. Although this method can already be directly applied, validation by 3D electrical mapping and prospective correlation to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response will be required for further translation into clinical practice.

Programming Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Electrical Synchrony: Reaching Beyond Left Bundle Branch Block and Left Ventricular Activation Delay

BACKGROUND

QRS narrowing following cardiac resynchronization therapy with biventricular (BiV) or left ventricular (LV) pacing is likely affected by patient-specific conduction characteristics (PR, qLV, LV-paced propagation interval), making a universal programming strategy likely ineffective. We tested these factors using a novel, device-based algorithm (SyncAV) that automatically adjusts paced atrioventricular delay (default or programmable offset) according to intrinsic atrioventricular conduction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-five patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (age 66±11 years; 65% male; 32% with ischemic cardiomyopathy; LV ejection fraction 28±8%; QRS duration 162±16 ms) with intact atrioventricular conduction (PR interval 194±34, range 128-300 ms), left bundle branch block, and optimized LV lead position were studied at implant. QRS duration (QRSd) reduction was compared for the following pacing configurations: nominal simultaneous BiV (Mode I: paced/sensed atrioventricular delay=140/110 ms), BiV+SyncAV with 50 ms offset (Mode II), BiV+SyncAV with offset that minimized QRSd (Mode III), or LV-only pacing+SyncAV with 50 ms offset (Mode IV). The intrinsic QRSd (162±16 ms) was reduced to 142±17 ms (-11.8%) by Mode I, 136±14 ms (-15.6%) by Mode IV, and 132±13 ms (-17.8%) by Mode II. Mode III yielded the shortest overall QRSd (123±12 ms, -23.9% [P<0.001 versus all modes]) and was the only configuration without QRSd prolongation in any patient. QRS narrowing occurred regardless of QRSd, PR, or LV-paced intervals, or underlying ischemic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-implant electrical optimization in already well-selected patients with left bundle branch block and optimized LV lead position is facilitated by patient-tailored BiV pacing adjusted to intrinsic atrioventricular timing using an automatic device-based algorithm.

Characterizing left ventricular mechanical and electrical activation in patients with normal and impaired systolic function using a non-fluoroscopic cardiovascular navigation system

PURPOSE

Cardiac disease frequently has a degenerative effect on cardiac pump function and regional myocardial contraction. Therefore, an accurate assessment of regional wall motion is a measure of the extent and severity of the disease. We sought to further validate an intra-operative, sensor-based technology for measuring wall motion and strain by characterizing left ventricular (LV) mechanical and electrical activation patterns in patients with normal (NSF) and impaired systolic function (ISF).

METHODS

NSF (n = 10; ejection fraction = 62.9 ± 6.1%) and ISF (n = 18; ejection fraction = 35.1 ± 13.6%) patients underwent simultaneous electrical and motion mapping of the LV endocardium using electroanatomical mapping and navigational systems (EnSite™ NavX™ and MediGuide™, Abbott). Motion trajectories, strain profiles, and activation times were calculated over the six standard LV walls.

RESULTS

NSF patients had significantly greater motion and systolic strains across all LV walls than ISF patients. LV walls with low-voltage areas showed less motion and systolic strain than walls with normal voltage. LV electrical dyssynchrony was significantly smaller in NSF and ISF patients with narrow-QRS complexes than ISF patients with wide-QRS complexes, but mechanical dyssynchrony was larger in all ISF patients than NSF patients. The latest mechanical activation was most often the lateral/posterior walls in NSF and wide-QRS ISF patients but varied in narrow-QRS ISF patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This intra-operative technique can be used to characterize LV wall motion and strain in patients with impaired systolic function. This technique may be utilized clinically to provide individually tailored LV lead positioning at the region of latest mechanical activation for patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01629160.

Maximization of interventricular conduction time by means of quadripolar leads for cardiac resynchronization therapy

PURPOSE

Identifying the left ventricular (LV) site associated with the maximum spontaneous interventricular conduction time (right ventricle (RV)-to-LV interval) has proved to be an effective strategy for optimal LV pacing site selection in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of our study was to determine whether quadripolar LV lead technology allows RV-to-LV interval maximization.

METHODS

We enrolled 108 patients undergoing implantation of a CRT system using an LV quadripolar lead and 114 patients who received a bipolar lead. On implantation, the RV-to-LV interval was measured for the dipole of the bipolar leads and for each electrode of the LV lead (tip, ring 2, ring 3, ring 4).

RESULTS

In the quadripolar group, the mean RV-to-LV interval ranged from 90 ± 33 ms (tip) to 94 ± 32 ms (R4) (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). In 55 (51%) patients, the RV-to-LV interval was > 80 ms at all electrodes, while in 27 (25%) patients, no electrodes were associated with an RV-to-LV interval > 80 ms. At least one LV pacing electrode was associated with an RV-to-LV interval > 80 ms in 62 (70%) patients with a short (36 mm) inter-electrode distance, and in 19 (95%, p = 0.022) of those with a long distance (50.5 mm). In the bipolar group, the mean RV-to-LV interval was 72 ± 37 ms (p < 0.001 versus quadripolar). The RV-to-LV interval was > 80 ms in 44 (39%) patients (p < 0.001 versus quadripolar leads with both short and long inter-electrode distance).

CONCLUSIONS

Quadripolar leads allow RV-to-LV interval maximization. An optimal RV-to-LV interval seems achievable in the majority of patients, especially if the leads present a long inter-electrode distance.

Bridging the gap between heart failure and the device clinic

INTRODUCTION

While cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a mainstay in the management of selected patients with chronic systolic dysfunction, many patients are noted to experience less than expected or no benefit at all from the therapy. Multidisciplinary care has been shown to provide benefit in follow up for patients receiving CRT devices. Areas covered: This review will focus on the apparent reasons behind less than optimal outcomes following CRT as well as multidisciplinary approaches to treating patients with CRT devices. The literature review focused mainly on the data behind multidisciplinary care of CRT patients. Expert commentary: A multidisciplinary approach incorporating input from various cardiology backgrounds is an important strategy in ensuring optimal outcomes in patients receiving CRT devices. Breaking down the 'silo' effect amongst cardiac subspecialties is vital in achieving high level multidisciplinary care.

Sex-specific mortality differences in heart failure patients with ischemia receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background

Recent studies have reported prognosis differences between male and female heart failure patients following cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, the potential clinical factors that underpin these differences remain to be elucidated.

Methods

A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the factors that characterize sex-specific differences following CRT. This analysis involved searching the Medline (Pubmed source) and Embase databases in the period from January 1980 to September 2016.

Results

Fifty-eight studies involving 33445 patients (23.08% of whom were women) were analyzed as part of this study. Only patients receiving CRT with follow-up greater than six months were included in our analysis. Compared with males, females exhibited a reduction of 33% (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.62–0.73; P < 0.0001) and 42% (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.46–0.74; P = 0.003) in all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization or heart failure, respectively. Following a stratified analysis of all-cause mortality, we observed that ischemic causes (p = 0.03) were likely to account for most of the sex-specific differences in relation to CRT.

Conclusion

These data suggest that women have a reduced risk of all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization or heart failure following CRT. Based on the results from the stratified analysis, we observed more optimal outcomes for females with ischemic heart disease. Thus, ischemia are likely to play a role in sex-related differences associated with CRT in heart failure patients. Further studies are required to determine other indications and the potential mechanisms that might be associated with sex-specific CRT outcomes.

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Heart Failure

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as a valued nonpharmacologic therapy in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (EF), and ventricular dyssynchrony manifest as left bundle branch block. The mechanisms of benefit include remodeling of the left ventricle leading to decreased dimensions and increased EF, as well as a decrease in the severity of mitral regurgitation. This article reviews the rationale, effects, and indications for CRT, and discusses the patient characteristics that predict response and considerations for nonresponders.

Coronary sinus lead delay index for optimization of coronary sinus lead placement

AIM

Optimization of coronary sinus (CS) lead position to the latest activated left ventricular (LV) area is important to increase cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response. We aimed to detect the relationship between coronary sinus lead delay index (CSDI) and echocardiographic, electrocardiographic response to CRT treatment.

METHODS

We prospectively included 137 consecutive patients with heart failure (HF) diagnosis, QRS ≥ 120 ms, left bundle branch block (LBBB), New York Heart Association score (NYHA) II-IV, LV ejection fraction (LVEF) <35% and scheduled for CRT (84 male, 53 female; mean age 65.1 ± 10.1 years). Echocardiographic CRT response was defined as ≥15% reduction in LV end-systolic volume (LVESV). CS lead sensing delay was calculated as the time interval from the onset of surface QRS wave to the onset of depolarization wave recorded from the CS lead by using the CS pacing lead as a bipolar electrode. CSDI was calculated by dividing the CS lead sensing delay by the QRS duration.

RESULTS

LVESV reduction was associated with baseline QRS width (r = .257, p = .002), QRS narrowing (r = .396, p < .001), CSDI (r = .357, p < .001), and NT-proBNP (r = -0.213, p = .022) in bivariate analysis. In logistic regression analysis, CSDI was found to be only independent parameter for predicting significant LVESV reduction (Beta = 0.318, p < .001). CSDI was also found to be significantly associated with LVEF increase (r = .244, p = .004) and QRS narrowing (r = .178, p = .046).

CONCLUSION

CSDI may be used as a marker to predict the favorable response to CRT. It may be useful to integrate CSDI to CRT implantation procedure in order to minimize nonresponders.