Echocardiography- versus intracardiac electrocardiogram-based optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the performance of echocardiography-based programming in comparison with the intracardiac electrocardiogram (IEGM)-based method for the optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using digital databases to systematically identify the studies reporting CRT optimization through echocardiography compared with IEGM. Detailed patient-level study characteristics including the type of study, sample size, therapy, the New York Heart Classification (NYHA) status, lead placement, and other parameters were abstracted. Finally, postprogramming outcomes were extracted for each article.

RESULTS

In a total of 11 studies, 919 patients were recruited for the final analysis. Overall, 692 (75.29%) were males. The mean duration of the QRS complex in our study population ranged from 145.2 ± 21.8 ms to 183 ± 19.9 ms. There was an equal improvement in the NYHA class between the two methods while the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) demonstrated an improvement by IEGM. Many studies supported IEGM to increase the 6-minute walk test and left ventricular outflow tract velocity time interval (LVOT VTI) when compared to echocardiography. The mean time for echocardiography-based optimization was 60.15 min while that of IEGM-based optimization was 6.65 min.

CONCLUSION

IEGM is an alternative method for CRT optimization in improving the NYHA class, LVEF, and LVOT VTI, and is less time-consuming when compared to the echocardiography-based methods.

Long-Term Effect of Different Optimizing Methods for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Heart Failure: A Randomized and Controlled Pilot Study

AIM

During cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), optimized programming of the atrioventricular (AV) delay and ventricular-to-ventricular (VV) interval can lead to improved hemodynamics, symptomatic response, and left ventricular systolic function. Currently, however, there is no recommendation for the best optimization method. This study aimed to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of 4 different CRT optimization methods.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-four consecutive CRT patients with severe heart failure and left bundle-branch block configuration were randomly assigned into four groups to undergo AV/VV delay optimization through echocardiogram (ECHO; n = 30), electrocardiogram (ECG; n = 32), QuickOpt algorithm (n = 28), and nominal AV/VV (n = 36) groups. Patients were followed up and underwent examinations, including New York Heart Association (NYHA) cardiac functional classification, 6-min walking distance (6MWD), and echocardiography, at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months, respectively. The patients' survival and clinical outcomes were compared among the four groups.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier survival analyses showed that the median survival was the same in the 4 groups: ECHO, 43 months; ECG, 44 months; QuickOpt, 44 months, and nominal, 41 months. At the 6-month follow-up, the reduction in left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was significantly less in the nominal group (-1.91 ± 2.58 mm) than that in the other three groups (ECHO: -3.70 ± 2.78 mm, p = 0.012; ECG: -3.53 ± 3.14 mm, p = 0.020; QuickOpt: -3.46 ± 2.65 mm, p = 0.032); 6MWD was significantly shorter in the nominal group (87.88 ± 34.76 m) than that in the other three groups (ECHO: 120.63 ± 56.93 m, p = 0.006; ECG: 114.97 ± 54.95 m, p = 0.020; QuickOpt: 114.57 ± 35.41 m, p = 0.027). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) significantly increased in ECHO (7.23 ± 2.76%, p = 0.010), ECG (8.50 ± 3.17%, p < 0.001), and QuickOpt (8.39 ± 2.90%, p < 0.001) compared with the nominal group (5.35 ± 2.59%). There were no significant differences among the groups in the aforementioned parameters at 24, 36, and 48 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

While LVEDD, LVEF, 6MWD, and NYHA were significantly improved in ECHO, ECG, and QuickOpt at 6 months, there were no significant improvements in any of the groups at 12, 24, and 48 months. These findings suggested that the long-term effect of the four CRT methods for heart failure was not significantly different.

Comparison between IEGM-based approach and echocardiography in AV/PV and VV delay optimization in CRT-D recipients (Quicksept study)

BACKGROUND

AtrioVentricular (AV) and InterVentricular (VV) delay optimization can improve ventricular function in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) and is usually performed by means of echocardiography. St Jude Medical has developed an automated algorhythm which calculates the optimal AV and VV delays (QuickOpt™) based on Intracardiac ElectroGrams, (IEGM), within 2 min. So far, the efficacy of the algorhythm has been tested acutely with standard lead position at right ventricular (RV) apex. Aim of this project is to evaluate the algorhythm performance in the mid- and long-term with RV lead located in mid-septum.

METHODS

AV and VV delays optimization data were collected in 13 centers using both echocardiographic and QuickOpt™ guidance in CRTD implanted patients provided with this algorhythm. Measurements of the aortic Velocity Time Integral (aVTI) were performed with both methods in a random order at pre-discharge, 6-month and 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were studied (46 males; age 68 ± 10y; EF 28 ± 7%). Maximum aVTI obtained by echocardiography at different AV delays, were compared with aVTI acquired at AV delays suggested by QuickOpt. The AV Pearson correlations were 0.96 at pre-discharge, 0.95 and 0,98 at 6- and 12- month follow-up respectively. After programming optimal AV, the same approach was used to compare echocardiographic aVTI with aVTI corresponding to the VV values provided by QuickOpt. The VV Pearson Correlation were 0,92 at pre-discharge, 0,88 and 0.90 at 6-month and 12- month follow-up respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

IEGM-based optimization provides comparable results with echocardiographic method (maximum aVTI) used as reference with mid-septum RV lead location.

Time to left ventricular reverse remodeling after cardiac resynchronization therapy: Better late than never

INTRODUCTION

Left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR), defined as reduction of end-diastolic and end-systolic dimensions and improvement of ejection fraction, is associated with the prognostic implications of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The time course of LVRR remains poorly characterized. Nevertheless, it has been suggested that it occurs ≤6 months after CRT.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the long-term echocardiographic and clinical evolution of patients with LVRR occurring >6 months after CRT and to identify predictors of a delayed LVRR response.

METHODS

A total of 127 consecutive patients after successful CRT implantation were divided into three groups according to LVRR response: Group A, 19 patients (15%) with LVRR after >6 months (late LVRR); Group B, 58 patients (46%) with LVRR before 6 months (early LVRR); and Group C, 50 patients (39%) without LVRR during follow-up (no LVRR).

RESULTS

The late LVRR group was older, more often had ischemic etiology and fewer patients were in NYHA class ≤II. Overall, group A presented LVRR between group B and C. This was also the case with the percentage of clinical response (68.4% vs. 94.8% vs. 38.3%, respectively, p<0.001), and hospital readmissions due to decompensated heart failure (31.6% vs. 12.1% vs. 57.1%, respectively, p<0.001). Ischemic etiology (OR 0.044; p=0.013) and NYHA functional class <III (OR 0.056; p=0.063) were the variables with the highest predictive value for late LVRR.

CONCLUSIONS

Late LVRR has better clinical and echocardiographic outcomes than no LVRR, although with a suboptimal response compared to the early LVRR population. Ischemic etiology and NYHA functional class <III are predictors of late LVRR.

Long-term clinical effects of programmer-guided atrioventricular and interventricular delay optimization: Intracardiac electrography versus echocardiography for cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure

Objectives

To compare the haemodynamic results and long-term clinical outcomes of intracardiac electrography (QuickOpt®; St Jude Medical, St Paul, MN, USA) and echocardiography for optimization of atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) delays in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

Methods

Patients with CRT devices were prospectively enrolled; AV/VV delays were optimized by either QuickOpt® or echocardiography. Patients in the QuickOpt® group underwent both echocardiography and QuickOpt® optimization, and QuickOpt® AV/VV delays were used to program the CRT. All patients were followed-up for 12 months.

Results

In total, 44 patients were enrolled. There was good correlation between AV/VV delays determined by QuickOpt® ( n = 20) and echocardiography ( n = 24). QuickOpt® was significantly faster than echocardiography-guided optimization. Cardiac function, 6-min walking distance and left ventricular ejection fraction were significantly and similarly improved in both groups at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline. In the QuickOpt® group, left ventricular end diastolic diameters were significantly smaller at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline.

Conclusions

QuickOpt® is a quick, convenient and easy to perform method for optimization of AV and VV delays, with a similar long-term clinical outcome to echocardiography-guided optimization.