Dynamic programming of atrioventricular delay improves electrical synchrony in a multicenter cardiac resynchronization therapy study

Evaluation of synchronized left ventricular pacing rate over biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

The adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) algorithm enables synchronized left ventricular pacing (sLVP) to achieve fusion with intrinsic right ventricular activation. Although sLVP presents benefits over biventricular pacing, the adequate sLVP rate for better clinical outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to assess the association between sLVP rates and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Our study cohort included 271 consecutive patients, who underwent CRT implantation between April 2016 and August 2021.

RESULTS

We evaluated 63 patients on whom we applied the aCRT algorithm [48 men, mean age: 64 ± 14 years; median follow-up period: 316 days (interquartile range: 212-809 days)]. At the 6-month follow-up after CRT implantation, the frequency of CRT responders was 71 % (n = 45). The sLVP rate was significantly higher in responders than in non-responders (75 ± 30 % vs. 47 ± 40 %, p = 0.003). Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis revealed that the optimal cut-off value during the sLVP rate was 59.4 % for the prediction of CRT responders (area under the curve, 0.70; sensitivity, 80 %; specificity, 61 %; positive predictive value, 84 %; and negative predictive value, 55 %). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the higher-sLVP group (sLVP ≧59.4 %, n = 43) had a better prognosis (cardiac death and heart failure hospitalization) than the lower-sLVP group (sLVP <59.4 %, n = 20) (log-rank p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox hazard analysis revealed that a higher sLVP rate was associated with a good prognosis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

sLVP was associated with CRT response, and a higher sLVP rate (≧59.4 %) was important for good prognosis in patients with aCRT.

The impact of chronotropic incompetence on atrioventricular conduction times in heart failure patients

BACKGROUND

Intrinsic atrioventricular (AV) conduction is used to optimize AV intervals with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in most device algorithms. Atrial pacing and heart rate affect conduction times, but little is known regarding differeces among chronotropic incompetent(CI) and competent(CC) patients to guide programming.

METHODS

RAVE was a multicenter prospective trial of CRT patients. Heart rate was increased with incremental atrial pacing and with submaximal exercise. According to the maximal heart rate achieved during exercise, patients were classified as either CI or CC. For CI patients, an additional symptom-limited exercise with rate-adaptive pacing activated was performed. Intracardiac intervals were measured from the implantable lead electrograms in multiple postures.

RESULTS

There were 12 subjects with CI and 24 with CC. With atrial pacing, AV interval immediately increased and gradually increased with incremental atrial pacing in all patients. However, the changes in the atrial to right ventricular (ARV) and atrial to left ventricular (ALV) intervals with increasing atrial pacing rates were about threefold greater in CI patients compared to CC patients (24.3 ± 28.9 vs. 7.2 ± 5.5 ms/10 bpm for ARV and 22.7 ± 25.6 vs. 7.1 ± 5.7 ms/10 bpm for ALV in the standing position, p < 0.05). In CI pacing with rate-adaptive pacing during exercise, AV interval changes with paced heart rate were variable.

CONCLUSIONS

The AV response to overdrive atrial pacing at rest may provide a simple means of identifying chronotropic competence in CRT patients. For patients with CI, who often require rate-adaptive atrial pacing, rate-adaptive AV algorithms should be adjusted individually.

Progress in Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy and Optimisation

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) has become the cornerstone of heart failure (HF) treatment. Despite the obvious benefit from this therapy, an estimated 30% of CRT patients do not respond ("non-responders"). The cause of "non-response" is multi-factorial and includes suboptimal device settings. To optimise CRT settings, echocardiography has been considered the gold standard but has limitations: it is user dependent and consumes time and resources. CRT proprietary algorithms have been developed to perform device optimisation efficiently and with limited resources. In this review, we discuss CRT optimisation including the various adopted proprietary algorithms and conduction system pacing.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy non-responder to responder conversion rate in the MORE-CRT MPP trial

AIMS

To assess the impact of MultiPoint™ Pacing (MPP) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) non-responders after 6 months of standard biventricular pacing (BiVP).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The trial enrolled 5850 patients who planned to receive a CRT device. The echocardiography core laboratory assessed CRT response before implant and after 6 months of BiVP; non-response to BiVP was defined as <15% relative reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV). Echocardiographic non-responders were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive MPP (541 patients) or continued BiVP (570 patients) for an additional 6 months and evaluated the conversion rate to the echocardiographic response. The characteristics of both groups at randomization were comparable. The percentage of non-responder patients who became responders to CRT therapy was 29.4% in the MPP arm and 30.4% in the BIVP arm (P = 0.743). In patients with ≥30 mm spacing between the two left ventricular pacing sites (MPP-AS), identified during the first phase as a potential beneficial subgroup, no significant difference in the conversion rate was observed.

CONCLUSION

Our trial shows that ∼30% of patients, who do not respond to CRT in the first 6 months, experience significant reverse remodelling in the following 6 months. This finding suggests that CRT benefit may be delayed or slowly incremental in a relevant proportion of patients and that the percentage of CRT responders may be higher than what has been described in short-/middle-term studies. MultiPoint™ Pacing does not improve CRT response in non-responders to BiVP, even with MPP-AS.

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.

Comparison of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing and Biventricular Pacing in Candidates for Resynchronization Therapy

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BVP) is a well established therapy in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), heart failure, and wide QRS or expected frequent ventricular pacing. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been shown to be a safe alternative to BVP.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes between BVP and LBBAP among patients undergoing CRT.

METHODS

This observational study included patients with LVEF ≤35% who underwent BVP or LBBAP for the first time for Class I or II indications for CRT from January 2018 to June 2022 at 15 international centers. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of time to death or heart failure hospitalization (HFH). Secondary outcomes included endpoints of death, HFH, and echocardiographic changes.

RESULTS

A total of 1,778 patients met inclusion criteria: 981 BVP, 797 LBBAP. The mean age was 69 ± 12 years, 32% were female, 48% had coronary artery disease, and mean LVEF was 27% ± 6%. Paced QRS duration in LBBAP was significantly narrower than baseline (128 ± 19 ms vs 161 ± 28 ms; P < 0.001) and significantly narrower compared to BVP (144 ± 23 ms; P < 0.001). Following CRT, LVEF improved from 27% ± 6% to 41% ± 13% (P < 0.001) with LBBAP compared with an increase from 27% ± 7% to 37% ± 12% (P < 0.001) with BVP, with significantly greater change from baseline with LBBAP (13% ± 12% vs 10% ± 12%; P < 0.001). On multivariable regression analysis, the primary outcome was significantly reduced with LBBAP compared with BVP (20.8% vs 28%; HR: 1.495; 95% CI: 1.213-1.842; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LBBAP improved clinical outcomes compared with BVP in patients with CRT indications and may be a reasonable alternative to BVP.

Visualization of the SyncAV® Algorithm for CRT Optimization by Non-invasive Imaging of Cardiac Electrophysiology: NICE-CRT Trial

(1) Background: Periodic repetitive AV interval optimization using a device-based algorithm in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices may improve clinical outcomes. There is an unmet need to successfully transform its application into clinical routine. (2) Methods: Non-invasive imaging of cardiac electrophysiology was performed in different device programming settings of the SyncAV^® algorithm in 14 heart failure patients with left bundle branch block and a PR interval ≤ 250 milliseconds to determine the shortest ventricular activation time. (3) Results: the best offset time (to be manually programmed) permitting automatic dynamic adjustment of the paced atrioventricular interval after every 256 heart beats was found to be 30 and 50 milliseconds, decreasing mean native QRS duration from 181.6 ± 23.9 milliseconds to 130.7 ± 10.0 and 130.1 ± 10.5 milliseconds, respectively (p = 0.01); this was followed by an offset of 40 milliseconds (decreasing QRS duration to 130.1 ± 12.2 milliseconds; p = 0.08). (4) Conclusions: The herein presented NICE-CRT study supports the current recommendation to program an offset of 50 milliseconds as default in patients with left bundle branch block and preserved atrioventricular conduction after implantation of a CRT device capable of SyncAV^® optimization. Alternatively, offset programming of 30 milliseconds may also be applied as default programming. In patients with no or poor CRT response, additional efforts should be spent to individualize best offset programming with electrocardiographic optimization techniques.

Electrocardiographic imaging demonstrates electrical synchrony improvement by dynamic atrioventricular delays in patients with left bundle branch block and preserved atrioventricular conduction

AIMS

Cardiac resynchronization therapy programmed to dynamically fuse pacing with intrinsic conduction using atrioventricular (AV) timing algorithms (e.g. SyncAV) has shown promise; however, mechanistic data are lacking. This study assessed the impact of SyncAV on electrical dyssynchrony across various pacing modalities using non-invasive epicardial electrocardiographic imaging (ECGi).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with left bundle-branch block (median QRS duration (QRSd) 162.7 ms) and intact AV conduction (PR interval 174.0 ms) were prospectively enrolled. ECGi was performed acutely during biventricular pacing with fixed nominal AV delays (BiV) and using SyncAV (optimized for the narrowest QRSd) during: BiV + SyncAV, LV-only single-site (LVSS + SyncAV), MultiPoint pacing (MPP + SyncAV), and LV-only MPP (LVMPP + SyncAV). Dyssynchrony was quantified via ECGi (LV activation time, LVAT; RV activation time, RVAT; LV electrical dispersion index, LVEDi; ventricular electrical uncoupling index, VEU; and biventricular total activation time, VVtat). Intrinsic conduction LVAT (124 ms) was significantly reduced by BiV pacing (109 ms) (P = 0.001) and further reduced by LVSS + SyncAV (103 ms), BiV + SyncAV (103 ms), LVMPP + SyncAV (95 ms), and MPP + SyncAV (90 ms). Intrinsic RVAT (93 ms), VVtat (130 ms), LVEDi (36 ms), VEU (50 ms), and QRSd (163 ms) were reduced by SyncAV across all pacing modes. More patients exhibited minimal LVAT, VVtat, LVEDi, and QRSd with MPP + SyncAV than any other modality.

CONCLUSION

Dynamic AV delay programming targeting fusion with intrinsic conduction significantly reduced dyssynchrony, as quantified by ECGi and QRSd for all evaluated pacing modes. MPP + SyncAV achieved the greatest synchrony overall but not for all patients, highlighting the value of pacing mode individualization during fusion optimization.

Impact of long-term optimizing atrioventricular delay using device-based algorithms on cardiac resynchronization therapy

Sub-optimal atrioventricular delay (AVD) is one of the main causes of non-responder for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Recently, device-based algorithms (DBAs) that provide optimal AVD based on intracardiac electrograms, have been developed. However, their long-term effectiveness is still unknown. This study aims to investigate the effect of optimizing AVD using DBAs over a long period, on the prognosis of patients undergoing CRT. A total of 118 patients who underwent CRT at our hospital between April 2008 and March 2018, were retrospectively reviewed; 61 of them with optimizing AVD using DBAs were classified into the treated group (group 1), and the remaining 57 were classified into the control group (group 2). The median follow-up period was 46.0 months. The responder and survival rate in group 1 were significantly better than those in group 2 (group 1 vs. group 2: responder rate = 64% vs. 46%, p = 0.046; survival rate: 85.2% vs. 64.9%, p = 0.02). Moreover, investigating only the non-responder population showed that group 1 had an improved survival rate compared to group 2 (group 1 vs. group 2 = 72.7% vs. 45.1%, p = 0.02). Optimizing AVD using DBAs was a significant contributor to the improved survival rate in CRT non-responders in multivariate analysis (HR 3.6, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the long-term optimizing AVD using DBAs improved the survival rate in CRT and the prognosis of CRT non-responders, as well.

Clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing compared to biventricular pacing in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BVP) is well-established therapy in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and bundle branch block or indication for pacing. Conduction system pacing (CSP) using His-bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has been shown to be a safe and more physiological alternative to BVP.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes between CSP and BVP among patients undergoing CRT.

METHODS

This observational study included consecutive patients with LVEF ≤35% and class I or II indications for CRT who underwent successful BVP or CSP at 2 major health care systems. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of time to death or heart failure hospitalization (HFH). Secondary outcomes included subgroup analysis in left bundle branch block as well as individual endpoints of death and HFH.

RESULTS

A total of 477 patients (32% female) met inclusion criteria (BVP 219; CSP 258 [HBP 87, LBBAP 171]). Mean age was 72 ± 12 years, and mean LVEF was 26% ± 6%. Comorbidities included hypertension 70%, diabetes mellitus 45%, and coronary artery disease 52%. Paced QRS duration in CSP was significantly narrower than BVP (133 ± 21 ms vs 153 ± 24 ms; P <.001). LVEF improved in both groups during mean follow-up of 27 ± 12 months and was greater after CSP compared to BVP (39.7% ± 13% vs 33.1% ± 12%; P <.001). Primary outcome of death or HFH was significantly lower with CSP vs BVP (28.3% vs 38.4%; hazard ratio 1.52; 95% confidence interval 1.082-2.087; P = .013).

CONCLUSION

CSP improved clinical outcomes compared to BVP in this large cohort of patients with indications for CRT.

ECG optimisation for CRT systems in the era of automatic algorithms: a comprehensive review

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) may fail in up to one third of patients, mainly due to anatomical and procedural issues. In the daily practice, ECG optimisation is largely used to address CRT delivery. Ineffective CRT can be related to non-optimal pacing timing as well as inadequate pacing-capture. A rate-competitive atrial fibrillation (AF) or a high daily burden of premature ventricular contractions (PVC) may also affect CRT by means of fusion or pseudo-fusion captures. Growing observations suggest that in a subset of patients with typical left bundle branch block (LBBB), selected LV pacing may be more effective, producing a complete fusion between the left pacing and the intrinsic right bundle activation. The His-ventricular (HV) interval is an invasive measurement (derived from electrophysiological study), which mainly reflects the RV activation (and its contribution to QRS timing) and has been proposed by some authors when addressing LV-paced–RV-sensed fusion. In sinus rhythm CRT patients, with baseline typical LBBB criteria and preserved AV conduction, the “dromotropic” management to achieve RV intrinsic activation with LV fusion is also “AV delay dependent”. In this regard, the RV intrinsic activation (detected by RV sensing) and the A (paced/sensed)-RV (sensed) interval are also influenced by the RV lead position within the RV. The current families of CRT devices have implemented automatic algorithms to optimise AV and VV timing intervals. The proof of principle is again the evidence that fusion of an LV-paced beat with intrinsic rhythm may be more beneficial than standard biventricular pacing, provided a preserved AV conduction. In the present review, all the above issues are discussed.

His-Optimized and Left Bundle Branch-Optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: In Control of Fusion Pacing

Fusion pacing, which exploits conduction via the intrinsic His-Purkinje system, forms the basis of recent cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) optimization algorithms. However, settings need to be constantly adjusted to accommodate for changes in AV conduction, and the algorithms are not always available (eg, depending on the device, in case of AV block or with atrial fibrillation). His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT), and left-bundle branch optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (LOT-CRT) which combines conduction system pacing with ventricular fusion pacing, provide constant fusion with ventricular activation (irrespective of intrinsic AV conduction). These modalities provide promising treatment strategies for patients with heart failure, especially in those with chronic atrial fibrillation who require CRT (in whom the atrial port is usually plugged and can be used to connect the conduction system pacing lead).

Betablockers and Ivabradine Titration According to Exercise Test in LV Only Fusion CRT Pacing

Background: Betablockers (BB)/ivabradine titration in fusion CRT pacing (CRTP) is understudied. Aim: To assess drug optimization using systematic exercise tests (ET) in fusion CRTP with preserved atrioventricular conduction (AVc). Methods: Changes in drug management were assessed during systematic follow-ups in CRTP patients without right ventricle lead. Shorter AVc (PR interval) allowed BB up-titration, while longer AVc needed BB down-titration, favoring ivabradine. Constant fusion pacing was the goal to improve outcomes. Results: 64 patients, 62.5 ± 9.5 y.o divided into three groups: shorter PR (<160 ms), normal (160−200 ms), longer (200−240 ms); follow-up 59 ± 26 months. Drugs were titrated in case of: capture loss due to AVc shortening (14%), AVc lengthening (5%), chronotropic incompetence (11%), maximum tracking rate issues (9%), brady/tachyarrhythmias (8%). Interventions: BB up-titration (78% shorter PR, 19% normal PR, 5% longer PR), BB down-titration (22% shorter PR, 14% normal PR), BB exclusion (16% longer PR), adding/up-titration ivabradine (22% shorter PR, 19% normal PR, 5% longer PR), ivabradine down-titration (22% shorter PR, 3% normal PR), ivabradine exclusion (11% normal PR, 5% longer PR). Drug strategy was changed in 165 follow-ups from 371 recorded (42% patients). Conclusions: BBs/ivabradine titration and routine ET during follow-ups in patients with fusion CRTP should be a standard approach to maximize resynchronization response. Fusion CRTP showed a positive outcome with important LV reverse remodeling and significant LVEF improvement in carefully selected patients.

OUP accepted manuscript

Electrical disturbances, such as atrial fibrillation (AF), dyssynchrony, tachycardia, and premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), are present in most patients with heart failure (HF). While these disturbances may be the consequence of HF, increasing evidence suggests that they may also cause or aggravate HF. Animal studies show that longer-lasting left bundle branch block, tachycardia, AF, and PVCs lead to functional derangements at the organ, cellular, and molecular level. Conversely, electrical treatment may reverse or mitigate HF. Clinical studies have shown the superiority of atrial and pulmonary vein ablation for rhythm control and AV nodal ablation for rate control in AF patients when compared with medical treatment. Ablation of PVCs can also improve left ventricular function. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established adjunct therapy currently undergoing several interesting innovations. The current guideline recommendations reflect the safety and efficacy of these ablation therapies and CRT, but currently, these therapies are heavily underutilized. This review focuses on the electrical treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We believe that the team of specialists treating an HF patient should incorporate an electrophysiologist in order to achieve a more widespread use of electrical therapies in the management of HFrEF and should also include individual conditions of the patient, such as body size and gender in therapy fine-tuning.

Tricuspid insufficiency after cardiac-implantable electronic device placement

Objective

Device-related estimates of incidence and significance of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is mainly based on case reports and small observational studies. We sought to determine whether right-heart device implantation increased the risk of TR in this interventional study.

Methods

All patients who underwent permanent pacemaker (PPM) or other device implantation were assessed for degree of TR at one year. The data collected was analyzed on IBM SPSS version 26. Descriptive statistics were applied for qualitative variables. Mean and standard deviation were applied for quantitative variables. Regression analysis and paired t-tests were applied for the degree of change and predictors of TR.

Results

Out of 165 participants, 73.94% were male. The mean age of the participants was 59.86 ± 12.03 years. Dual-chamber pacemaker (DDDR) was the most common device implanted (78.18%) causing significant TR and drop in left ventricular ejection fraction as compared to other devices (p-value < 0.05). The paired t-test for changes in ejection fraction (LVEF) and TR were also significant (p-value < 0.05). A regression model predicted significant TR to depend on baseline LVEF (p-value < 0.05).

Conclusion

Device-related worsening of TR is related to mechanical mechanisms. It is significantly associated with DDDR pacemakers after a 1-year follow-up.

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.

Improvement of LV Reverse Remodeling Using Dynamic Programming of Fusion-Optimized Atrioventricular Intervals in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: The patient-tailored SyncAV algorithm shortens the QRS duration (QRSd) beyond what conventional biventricular (BiV) pacing can. However, evidence of the ability of SyncAV to improve the cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of CRT enhanced by SyncAV on echocardiographic and clinical responses.

Methods and Results: Consecutive heart failure (HF) patients from three centers treated with a quadripolar CRT system (Abbott) were enrolled. The total of 122 patients were divided into BiV+SyncAV (n = 68) and BiV groups (n = 54) according to whether they underwent CRT with or without SyncAV. Electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and clinical data were assessed at baseline and during follow-up. Echocardiographic response to CRT was defined as a ≥15% decrease in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), and clinical response was defined as a NYHA class reduction of ≥1. At the 6-month follow-up, the baseline QRSd and LVESV decreased more significantly in the BiV+SyncAV than in the BiV group (QRSd −36.25 ± 16.33 vs. −22.72 ± 18.75 ms, P < 0.001; LVESV −54.19 ± 38.87 vs. −25.37 ± 36.48 ml, P < 0.001). Compared to the BiV group, more patients in the BiV+SyncAV group were classified as echocardiographic (82.35 vs. 64.81%; P = 0.036) and clinical responders (83.82 vs. 66.67%; P = 0.033). During follow-up, no deaths due to HF deterioration or severe procedure related complications occurred.

Conclusion: Compared to BiV pacing, BiV combined with SyncAV leads to a more significant reduction in QRSd and improves LV remodeling and long-term outcomes in HF patients treated with CRT.

Device-Based Solutions to Improve Cardiac Physiology and Hemodynamics in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Characterized by a rapidly increasing prevalence, elevated mortality and rehospitalization rates, and inadequacy of pharmaceutical therapies, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has motivated the widespread development of device-based solutions. HFpEF is a multifactorial disease of various etiologies and phenotypes, distinguished by diminished ventricular compliance, diastolic dysfunction, and symptoms of heart failure despite a normal ejection performance; these symptoms include pulmonary hypertension, limited cardiac reserve, autonomic imbalance, and exercise intolerance. Several types of atrial shunts, left ventricular expanders, stimulation-based therapies, and mechanical circulatory support devices are currently under development aiming to target one or more of these symptoms by addressing the associated mechanical or hemodynamic hallmarks. Although the majority of these solutions have shown promising results in clinical or preclinical studies, no device-based therapy has yet been approved for the treatment of patients with HFpEF. The purpose of this review is to discuss the rationale behind each of these devices and the findings from the initial testing phases, as well as the limitations and challenges associated with their clinical translation.

Fusion Pacing with Biventricular, Left Ventricular-only and Multipoint Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: Latest Evidence and Strategies for Use

Despite advances in the field of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), response rates and durability of therapy remain relatively static. Optimising device timing intervals may be the most common modifiable factor influencing CRT efficacy after implantation. This review addresses the concept of fusion pacing as a method for improving patient outcomes with CRT. Fusion pacing describes the delivery of CRT pacing with a programming strategy to preserve intrinsic atrioventricular (AV) conduction and ventricular activation via the right bundle branch. Several methods have been assessed to achieve fusion pacing. QRS complex duration (QRSd) shortening with CRT is associated with improved clinical response. Dynamic algorithm-based optimisation targeting narrowest QRSd in patients with intact AV conduction has shown promise in people with heart failure with left bundle branch block. Individualised dynamic programming achieving fusion may achieve the greatest magnitude of electrical synchrony, measured by QRSd narrowing.

The evolution of cardiac resynchronization therapy and an introduction to conduction system pacing: a conceptual review

In chronic systolic heart failure and conduction system disease, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the only known non-pharmacologic heart failure therapy that improves cardiac function, functional capacity, and survival while decreasing cardiac workload and hospitalization rates. While conventional bi-ventricular pacing has been shown to benefit patients with heart failure and conduction system disease, there are limitations to its therapeutic success, resulting in widely variable clinical response. Limitations of conventional CRT evolve around myocardial scar, fibrosis, and inability to effectively simulate diseased tissue. Studies have shown endocardial stimulation in closer proximity to the specialized conduction system is more effective when compared with epicardial stimulation. Several observational and acute haemodynamic studies have demonstrated improved electrical resynchronization and echocardiographic response with conduction system pacing (CSP). Our objective is to provide a systematic review of the evolution of CRT, and an introduction to CSP as an intriguing, though experimental physiologic alternative to conventional CRT.

Ventricular activation patterns during intrinsic conduction and right ventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients

BACKGROUND

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) involves stimulation of both right ventricle (RV) and left ventricle (LV). LV pacing from the sites of delayed electrical activation improves CRT response. The RV-LV conduction is typically measured in intrinsic rhythm. The differences in RV-LV conduction patterns and timing between intrinsic rhythm and during paced RV activation, these differences are not fully understood.

METHODS

Enrolled patients were implanted with a de novo CRT device and quadripolar LV lead, with lead implant locations at the implanting physician's discretion. QRS duration and conduction delay between the RV lead and each of the four LV electrodes (D1, M2, M3, and P4) were measured during intrinsic conduction and RV pacing.

RESULTS

Conduction measurements were collected from 275 patients across 14 international centers (68 ± 13 years of age, 73% male, 45% ischemic, 158 ± 22 ms QRS duration). Mean RV-LV conduction time was shorter during intrinsic conduction versus RV pacing by 59.6 ms (106.5 ± 36.5 versus 166.1 ± 32.1 ms, p < 0.001). The intra-LV activation delay between the latest and earliest activating LV electrode was also shorter during intrinsic conduction versus RV pacing by 6.6 ms (20.6 ± 13.1 vs. 27.2 ± 21.2 ms, p < 0.001). Intrinsic conduction and RV pacing resulted in a different activation order in 72.7% of patients, and the same LV activation order in 27.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in RV-LV conduction time, intra-LV conduction time, and activation pattern were observed between intrinsic conduction and RV pacing. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating intrinsic versus paced ventricular activation to guide LV pacing site selection in CRT patients.

His-Optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Ventricular Fusion Pacing for Electrical Resynchronization in Heart Failure

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) for reducing left ventricular activation time (LVAT) compared to His bundle pacing (HBP) and biventricular (BiV) pacing (including multipoint pacing [MPP]), using electrocardiographic (ECG) imaging.

BACKGROUND

HBP may correct bundle branch block (BBB) and has shown encouraging results for providing CRT. However, HBP does not correct BBB in all patients and may be combined with univentricular or BiV fusion pacing to deliver HOT-CRT to maximize resynchronization.

METHODS

Nineteen patients with a standard indication for CRT, implanted with HBP without correction of BBB and BiV (n = 14) or right ventricular (n = 5) leads, were prospectively enrolled. Patients underwent ECG imaging while pacing in different configurations using different LV electrodes and at different HBP ventricular pacing (VP) delays. The primary endpoint was reduction in LVAT with HOT-CRT, and the secondary endpoints included various other dys-synchrony measurements including right ventricular activation time (RVAT).

RESULTS

Compared to HBP, HOT-CRT reduced LVAT by 21% (-17 ms [95% confidence interval [CI]: -25 to -9 ms]; p < 0.001) and outperformed BiV by 24% (-22 ms [95% CI: -33 to -10 ms]; p = 0.002) and MPP by 13% (-11 ms [95% CI: -21 to -1 ms]; p = 0.035). Relative to HBP, HOT-CRT also reduced RVAT by 7% (-5 ms [95% CI: -9 to -1 ms; p = 0.035) in patients with right BBB, whereas RVAT was increased by BiV. The other electrical dyssynchrony measurements also improved with HOT-CRT.

CONCLUSIONS

HOT-CRT acutely improves ventricular electrical synchrony beyond BiV and MPP. The impact of this finding needs to be evaluated further in studies with clinical follow-up. (Electrical Resynchronization and Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Direct His Bundle Pacing Compared to Biventricular Pacing; NCT03452462).

Multipoint Pacing with Fusion-optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Using It All to Narrow QRS Duration

Adaptive atrioventricular (AV)-shortening algorithms have achieved QRS duration (QRSd) narrowing in traditional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients. Multipoint pacing (MPP) has also demonstrated benefit in this population. An additional site of activation via intrinsic conduction of the septum may further contribute to CRT; however, the incorporation of all strategies together has yet to be explored. We therefore developed and tested a method combining MPP-CRT and controlled septal contribution to create a multifuse pacing (MFP) technique, establishing four ventricular activation sites for CRT patients using measurements from intracardiac electrograms (EGMs) and incorporating an AV-delay shortening algorithm (SyncAV™; Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA) to narrow the QRSd. Patients in sinus rhythm with an AV conduction time of less than 350 ms were included in this analysis and were further stratified by strictly defined left bundle branch block (sLBBB) or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (IVCD). EGM-based measurements to determine the QRS septal onset to right ventricular (RV) time (SRAT) and the left ventricular (LV) to RV pacing conduction time were collected and applied to a formula to facilitate MFP. QRSd was compared between before and after programming. A total of 22 patients (19 men and three women) with similar baseline characteristics were compared (all values in mean ± standard deviation). The overall baseline QRSd of 153.31 ± 24.60 ms was decreased to 115.31 ± 16.31 ms after MFP programming (p < 0.0001). The measured SRAT was 59.40 ± 28.49 ms, resulting in a negative AV offset of −20.0 ± 24.97 ms. Patients in the sLBBB group (n = 7) were aged 67.8 ± 13.3 years and had a QRSd of 168.85 ± 27.29 ms that decreased to 113 ± 16.69 ms for a reduction of 55.42 ± 19.3 ms or 32.1% (p = 0.0003). In the IVCD group (n = 15), the baseline QRSd of 146.06 ± 20.29 ms was decreased to 116 ± 16.66 ms for a reduction of 30.07 ± 16.41 ms or 20.62% (p = 0.0001). When comparing the sLBBB and IVCD groups, the sLBBB group was favored by a reduction of 25.35 ms (p = 0.00046). Ultimately, MFP achieved statistically significant reductions in QRSd in all patients tested in this analysis. The benefit was also significantly better in the sLBBB group as compared with in the IVCD group.

Impact of synchronous atrioventricular delay optimization on left ventricle flow force angle evaluated by echocardiographic particle image velocimetry

PURPOSE

To evaluate the improvement in electrical synchrony and left ventricle (LV) hemodynamics provided by combining the dynamic atrioventricular delay (AVD) of SyncAV^TM CRT and the multiple LV pacing sites of MultiPoint pacing (MPP).

METHODS

Patients with LBBB and QRS duration (QRSd) > 140 ms implanted with a CRT-D or CRT-P device and quadripolar LV lead were enrolled in this prospective study. During a post-implant follow-up visit, QRSd was measured from 12-lead surface electrograms by experts blinded to pacing configurations. QRSd reduction relative to intrinsic rhythm was evaluated during biventricular pacing (BiV) and MPP for two AVDs: nominal (140/110 ms paced/sensed) and SyncAV (patient-optimized SyncAV offset [10-60 ms] minimizing QRSd). Echocardiography particle imaging velocimetry (Echo-PIV) analysis was performed for each configuration. The resulting hemodynamic force LV flow angle (φ) was analyzed, which ranges from 0^o (predominantly base-apex forces) to 90^o (predominantly transverse forces). Higher angles indicate more energy dissipation at lateral walls due to transverse flow; lower angles indicate healthier flow aligned with the longitudinal base-apex path of the pressure gradient.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (58% male, 17% ischemic, 32±7% ejection fraction, 165 ± 18 ms intrinsic QRSd) completed QRSd and Echo-PIV assessment. Relative to intrinsic rhythm, BiV and MPP with nominal AVD reduced QRSd by 10 ± 9% and 12 ± 9%, respectively. BiV+SyncAV and MPP+SyncAV further reduced QRSd by 19 ± 8%, (p < 0.05 vs. BiV with nominal AVD) and 23 ± 9% (p < 0.05 vs BiV+SyncAV), respectively. Echo-PIV showed similar sequential hemodynamic improvements. LV flow angular orientation during intrinsic activation (46 ± 3^o) reduced with BiV+SyncAV (37 ± 4^o, p < 0.05 vs intrinsic) and further with MPP+SyncAV (34 ± 4^o, p < 0.05 vs BiV+SyncAV).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that SyncAV may improve electrical synchrony and influence LV flow patterns in patients suffering from heart failure compared to conventional CRT with a fixed AVD, with further improvement observed by combining with MPP.

Fusion pacing in patients with right bundle branch block who undergo cardiac resynchronization therapy

PURPOSE

Patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) are less likely to respond to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We aimed to assess whether patients with RBBB respond to CRT with biventricular fusion pacing.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with RBBB at a single tertiary care center, who were implanted with a CRT device capable of biventricular fusion pacing using SyncAV programming, were assessed and compared to a historical cohort of CRT patients with RBBB. QRSd was measured and compared during intrinsic conduction, nominal CRT pacing and manual electrocardiogram-based optimized SyncAV programming. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was also compared before and 6 months after CRT.

RESULTS

We included 8 consecutive patients with RBBB (group 1) who were able to undergo SyncAV programming and 16 patients with RBBB (group 2) from a historical cohort. In group 1, compared to mean intrinsic conduction QRSd (155 ± 13 ms), mean nominally-paced QRSd was 156 ± 15 ms (ΔQRSd 1.3 ± 11.6; p = 0.77) and SyncAV-optimized paced QRSd was 135 ± 14 ms (ΔQRSd -20.0 ± 20.4; p = 0.03 and ΔQRSd -21.3 ± 16.3; p = 0.008; compared to intrinsic conduction and nominal pacing respectively). In group 2, mean QRSd with nominal pacing was 160 ± 24 ms (ΔQRSd 3.8 ± 33.4; p = 0.66 compared to intrinsic conduction). In group 1, baseline LVEF was 22.1 ± 11.5 and after 6 months of follow-up was 27.8 ± 8.6 (p = 0.047). In group 2, the baseline LVEF was 27.2 ± 10.6 and after 6 months of follow-up was 25.0 ± 10.0 (p = 0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

CRT programed to allow biventricular fusion pacing significantly improved electrical synchrony and LVEF in patients with RBBB. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings.

Non-invasive hemodynamic determination of patient-specific optimal pacing mode in cardiac resynchronization therapy

PURPOSE

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices have multiple programmable pacing parameters. The purpose of this study was to determine the best pacing mode, i.e., associated with the greatest acute hemodynamic response, in each patient.

METHODS

Patients in sinus rhythm and intact atrioventricular conduction were included within 3 months of implantation of devices featuring SyncAV and multipoint pacing (MPP) algorithms. The effect of nominal biventricular pacing using the latest activated electrode (BiV-Late), optimized atrioventricular delay (AVD), nominal and optimized SyncAV, and anatomical MPP was determined by non-invasive measurement of systolic blood pressure (SBP). CRT response was defined as SBP increase > 10% relative to baseline.

RESULTS

Thirty patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) were included. BiV-Late increased SBP compared to intrinsic rhythm (128 ± 21 mmHg vs. 121 ± 22 mmHg, p = 0.0002). The best pacing mode further increased SBP to 140 ± 19 mmHg (p < 0.0001 vs. BiV-Late). The proportion of CRT responders increased from 40% with BiV-Late to 80% with the best pacing mode (p = 0.0005). Compared to BiV-Late, optimized AVD and optimized SyncAV increased SBP (to 134 ± 21 mmHg, p = 0.004, and 133 ± 20 mmHg, p = 0.0003, respectively), but nominal SyncAV and MPP did not. The best pacing mode was variable between patients and was different from nominal BiV-Late in 28 (93%) patients. Optimized AVD was the most frequent best mode, in 14 (47%) patients.

CONCLUSION

In patients with LBBB, the best pacing mode was patient-specific and doubled the magnitude of acute hemodynamic response and the proportion of acute CRT responders compared to nominal BiV-Late pacing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03779802.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure patients: tough road but clear future

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) based on biventricular pacing (BVP) is an invaluable intervention currently used in heart failure (HF) patients. The therapy involves electromechanical dyssynchrony, which can not only improve heart function and quality of life but also reduce hospitalization and mortality rates. However, approximately 30% to 40% of patients remain unresponsive to conventional BVP in clinical practice. In the recent years, extensive research has been employed to find a more physiological approach to cardiac resynchronization. The His-Purkinje system pacing (HPSP) including His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) may potentially be the future of CRT. These technologies present various advantages including offering an almost real physiological pacing, less complicated procedures, and economic feasibility. Additionally, other methods, such as isolated left-ventricular pacing and multipoint pacing, may in the future be important but non-mainstream alternatives to CRT because currently, there is no strong evidence to support their effectiveness. This article reviews the current situation and latest progress in CRT, explores the existing technology, and highlights future prospects in the development of CRT.

Optimization of Chronic Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Fusion Pacing Algorithm Improves Echocardiographic Response

Background

Whether reprogramming of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) to increase electrical synchrony translates into echocardiographic improvement remains unclear. SyncAV is an algorithm that allows fusion of intrinsic conduction with biventricular pacing. We aimed to assess whether reprogramming chronically implanted CRT devices with SyncAV is associated with improved echocardiographic parameters.

Methods

Patients at a quaternary center with previously implanted CRT devices with a programmable SyncAV algorithm underwent routine electrocardiography-based SyncAV optimization during regular device clinic visits. This analysis included only patients who could be programmed to the SyncAV algorithm (i.e., in sinus rhythm with intrinsic atrioventricular conduction). Echocardiography was performed before and 6 months after CRT optimization.

Results

Of 64 consecutive, potentially eligible patients who underwent assessment, 34 who were able to undergo SyncAV programming were included. Their mean age was 74 ± 9 years, 41% were female, and 59% had ischemic cardiomyopathy. The mean time from CRT implant to SyncAV optimization was 17.8 ± 8.5 months. At 6-month follow-up, SyncAV optimization was associated with a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (mean LVEF 36.5% ± 13.3% vs 30.9% ± 13.3%; P < 0.001) and a reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) (mean LVESV 110.5 ± 57.5 mL vs 89.6 ± 52.4 mL; P < 0.001) compared with baseline existing CRT programming.

Conclusion

CRT reprogramming to maximize biventricular fusion pacing significantly increased LVEF and reduced LVESV in patients with chronic CRT devices. Further studies are needed to assess if a continuous fusion pacing algorithm improves long-term clinical outcomes and to identify which patients are most likely to derive benefit.

Patient-tailored SyncAV algorithm: A novel strategy to improve synchrony and acute hemodynamic response in heart failure patients treated by cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

Several automatic algorithms have developed to optimize the timing cycle setting in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The present study aims to investigate whether the novel device-based SyncAV algorithm could elicit better synchrony and acute hemodynamic response.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty five patients undergoing CRT implantation were prospectively studied. The device was programmed to three biventricular (BiV) pacing modes sequentially after the procedure: QuickOpt algorithm (mode I), SyncAV algorithm with default 50 ms offset (mode II), and SyncAV algorithm with optimized offset minimizing QRS duration (QRSd) (mode III). After each setting, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic data were collected. As a result, QRSd was reduced from 172.8 ± 17.9 ms during intrinsic conduction to 153.1 ± 15.9 ms in mode I, further narrowed to 140.5 ± 16.7 ms in mode II, and reached shortest (134.8 ± 16.1 ms) in mode III (P < .01 for all). Besides, significantly shorter QT intervals were observed in mode I (453.2 ± 45.5 ms), mode II (443.9 ± 34.2 ms) and mode III (444.1 ± 28.7 ms), compared with native condition (472.5 ± 51.2 ms) (P < .01). All three BiV modes exhibited comparable T_p T_e interval and T_p T_e /QT ratio (P > .05). Mode I presented significantly higher aortic velocity time integral than intrinsic conduction (21.0 ± 6.4 cm vs 18.4 ± 5.5 cm; P < .01), which was even higher in mode II (22.0 ± 6.5 cm) and mode III (23.7 ± 6.5 cm). All three BiV modes significantly reduced standard deviation of time to peak contraction of 12-LV segments (Ts-SD) (Mode I: 55.2 ± 16.5 ms, Mode II: 50.2 ± 14.7 ms, Mode III: 45.4 ± 14.4 ms) compared with intrinsic conduction (66.3 ± 18.4 ms) (P < .01), with Mode III demonstrating the smallest (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

SyncAV CRT ameliorated electrical and mechanical synchrony as well as acute hemodynamic response beyond conventional QuickOpt optimization. An additional individualized adjustment to the SyncAV offset added to its advantage.

Dynamic atrioventricular delay programming improves ventricular electrical synchronization as evaluated by 3D vectorcardiography

BACKGROUND

Optimal timing of the atrioventricular delay in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can improve synchrony in patients suffering from heart failure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of SyncAV™ on electrical synchrony as measured by vectorcardiography (VCG) derived QRS metrics during bi-ventricular (BiV) pacing.

METHODS

Patients implanted with a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device and quadripolar left ventricular (LV) lead underwent 12‑lead ECG recordings. VCG metrics, including QRS duration (QRSd) and area, were derived from the ECG by a blinded observer during: intrinsic conduction, BiV with nominal atrioventricular delays (BiV Nominal), and BiV with SyncAV programmed to the optimal offset achieving maximal synchronization (BiV + SyncAV Opt).

RESULTS

One hundred patients (71% male, 40% ischemic, 65% LBBB, 32 ± 9% ejection fraction) completed VCG assessment. QRSd during intrinsic conduction (166 ± 25 ms) was narrowed successively by BiV Nominal (137 ± 23 ms, p < .05 vs. intrinsic) and BiV + SyncAV Opt (122 ± 22 ms, p < .05 vs. BiV Nominal). Likewise, 3D QRS area during intrinsic conduction (90 ± 42 mV ∗ ms) was reduced by BiV Nominal (65 ± 39 mV ∗ ms, p < .05 vs. intrinsic) and further by BiV + SyncAV Opt (53 ± 30 mV ∗ ms, p = .06 vs. BiV Nominal).

CONCLUSION

With VCG-based, patient-specific optimization of the programmable offset, SyncAV reduced electrical dyssynchrony beyond conventional CRT.