His-Purkinje Conduction System Pacing Optimized Trial of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy vs Biventricular Pacing: HOT-CRT Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

His-Purkinje conduction system pacing (HPCSP) using His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has emerged as an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to compare the feasibility and clinical efficacy of HOT-CRT (His-Purkinje conduction system pacing Optimized Trial of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) with BVP in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction, and indication for CRT.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of HOT-CRT and BVP in patients with LVEF <50% and indications for CRT. If HPCSP resulted in incomplete electrical resynchronization, a coronary sinus (CS) lead was added. The primary outcome was the change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was freedom from major complications.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients (female 31%, aged 70 ± 12 years, LVEF 31.5% ± 9.0%) were randomized. HOT-CRT was successful in 48 of 50 (96%) and BVP-CRT in 41 of 50 (82%) patients (P = 0.03). QRS duration significantly decreased from 164 ± 26 ms to 137 ± 20 ms with HOT-CRT and 166 ± 28 ms to 141 ± 19 ms with BVP. Fluoroscopy results (18.8 ± 12.4 min vs 23.8 ± 12.4 min, P = 0.05) and procedure duration (119 ± 42 min vs 114 ± 36 min, P = 0.5) were similar. The primary outcome of change in LVEF at 6 months was greater in HOT-CRT than in BVP (12.4% ± 7.3% vs 8.0% ± 10.1%, P = 0.02). The primary safety endpoint was similar (98% vs 94%, P = 0.62). Echocardiographic response of improvement in LVEF >5% occurred in 80% vs 61% (P = 0.06). Complications occurred in 3 (6%) in HOT-CRT vs 10 (20%) in BVP (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

HPCSP-guided CRT resulted in greater change in LVEF compared with BVP. Randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up are necessary. (His-Purkinje Conduction System Pacing Optimized Trial of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy [HOT-CRT]; NCT04561778).

The Brown Assessment of Beliefs Scale: reliability and validity

OBJECTIVE

The authors developed and evaluated the reliability and validity of the Brown Assessment of Beliefs Scale, a clinician-administered seven-item scale designed to assess delusions across a wide range of psychiatric disorders.

METHOD

The authors developed the scale after reviewing the literature on the assessment of delusions. Four raters administered the scale to 20 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), 20 patients with body dysmorphic disorder, and 10 patients with mood disorder with psychotic features. Audiotaped interviews of scale administration conducted by one rater were independently scored by the other raters to evaluate interrater reliability. The scale was administered to 27 patients twice to determine test-retest reliability. Other insight instruments as well as scales that assess symptom severity were administered to assess convergent and discriminant validity. Sensitivity to change was assessed in a multicenter treatment study of sertraline for OCD.

RESULTS

Interrater and test-retest reliability for the total score and individual item scores was excellent, with a high degree of internal consistency. One factor was obtained that accounted for 56% of the variance. Scores on the Brown Assessment of Beliefs Scale were not correlated with symptom severity but were correlated with other measures of insight. The scale was sensitive to change in insight in OCD but was not identical to improvement in severity.

CONCLUSIONS

The Brown Assessment of Beliefs Scale is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing delusionality in a number of psychiatric disorders. This scale may help clarify whether delusional and nondelusional variants of disorders constitute the same disorder as well as whether delusionality affects treatment outcome and prognosis.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the frequency of DSM-III-R obsessive-compulsive disorder in patients with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

METHOD

Patients with schizophrenia (N = 52) or schizoaffective disorder (N = 25) were evaluated for the presence of obsessions and compulsions by means of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R, the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, chart review, and contact with the treating clinicians.

RESULTS

Six (7.8%) of the 77 patients met the DSM-III-R criteria for both obsessive-compulsive disorder and schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that obsessive-compulsive disorder occurs in a substantial percentage of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The addition of medications targeted at obsessive-compulsive disorder may be beneficial to these patients but requires systematic evaluation.