Characterization of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy by post-procedural computed tomography

Cardiac CT in CRT as a Singular Imaging Modality for Diagnosis and Patient-Tailored Management

Between 30-40% of patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) do not show an improvement in left ventricular (LV) function. It is generally known that patient selection, LV lead implantation location, and device timing optimization are the three main factors that determine CRT response. Research has shown that image-guided CRT placement, which takes into account both anatomical and functional cardiac properties, positively affects the CRT response rate. In current clinical practice, a multimodality imaging approach comprised of echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, or nuclear medicine imaging is used to capture these features. However, with cardiac computed tomography (CT), one has an all-in-one acquisition method for both patient selection and the division of a patient-tailored, image-guided CRT placement strategy. This review discusses the applicability of CT in CRT patient identification, selection, and guided placement, offering insights into potential advancements in optimizing CRT outcomes.

Combination of personalized computational modeling and machine learning for optimization of left ventricular pacing site in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Introduction: The 30-50% non-response rate to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) calls for improved patient selection and optimized pacing lead placement. The study aimed to develop a novel technique using patient-specific cardiac models and machine learning (ML) to predict an optimal left ventricular (LV) pacing site (ML-PS) that maximizes the likelihood of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement in a given CRT candidate. To validate the approach, we evaluated whether the distance D_PS between the clinical LV pacing site (ref-PS) and ML-PS is associated with improved response rate and magnitude. Materials and methods: We reviewed retrospective data for 57 CRT recipients. A positive response was defined as a more than 10% LVEF improvement. Personalized models of ventricular activation and ECG were created from MRI and CT images. The characteristics of ventricular activation during intrinsic rhythm and biventricular (BiV) pacing with ref-PS were derived from the models and used in combination with clinical data to train supervised ML classifiers. The best logistic regression model classified CRT responders with a high accuracy of 0.77 (ROC AUC = 0.84). The LR classifier, model simulations and Bayesian optimization with Gaussian process regression were combined to identify an optimal ML-PS that maximizes the ML-score of CRT response over the LV surface in each patient. Results: The optimal ML-PS improved the ML-score by 17 ± 14% over the ref-PS. Twenty percent of the non-responders were reclassified as positive at ML-PS. Selection of positive patients with a max ML-score >0.5 demonstrated an improved clinical response rate. The distance D_PS was shorter in the responders. The max ML-score and D_PS were found to be strong predictors of CRT response (ROC AUC = 0.85). In the group with max ML-score > 0.5 and D_PS< 30 mm, the response rate was 83% compared to 14% in the rest of the cohort. LVEF improvement in this group was higher than in the other patients (16 ± 8% vs. 7 ± 8%). Conclusion: A new technique combining clinical data, personalized heart modelling and supervised ML demonstrates the potential for use in clinical practice to assist in optimizing patient selection and predicting optimal LV pacing lead position in HF candidates for CRT.

Machine Learning Prediction of Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy Response From Combination of Clinical and Model-Driven Data

Background: Up to 30–50% of chronic heart failure patients who underwent cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) do not respond to the treatment. Therefore, patient stratification for CRT and optimization of CRT device settings remain a challenge.

Objective: The main goal of our study is to develop a predictive model of CRT outcome using a combination of clinical data recorded in patients before CRT and simulations of the response to biventricular (BiV) pacing in personalized computational models of the cardiac electrophysiology.

Materials and Methods: Retrospective data from 57 patients who underwent CRT device implantation was utilized. Positive response to CRT was defined by a 10% increase in the left ventricular ejection fraction in a year after implantation. For each patient, an anatomical model of the heart and torso was reconstructed from MRI and CT images and tailored to ECG recorded in the participant. The models were used to compute ventricular activation time, ECG duration and electrical dyssynchrony indices during intrinsic rhythm and BiV pacing from the sites of implanted leads. For building a predictive model of CRT response, we used clinical data recorded before CRT device implantation together with model-derived biomarkers of ventricular excitation in the left bundle branch block mode of activation and under BiV stimulation. Several Machine Learning (ML) classifiers and feature selection algorithms were tested on the hybrid dataset, and the quality of predictors was assessed using the area under receiver operating curve (ROC AUC). The classifiers on the hybrid data were compared with ML models built on clinical data only.

Results: The best ML classifier utilizing a hybrid set of clinical and model-driven data demonstrated ROC AUC of 0.82, an accuracy of 0.82, sensitivity of 0.85, and specificity of 0.78, improving quality over that of ML predictors built on clinical data from much larger datasets by more than 0.1. Distance from the LV pacing site to the post-infarction zone and ventricular activation characteristics under BiV pacing were shown as the most relevant model-driven features for CRT response classification.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that combination of clinical and model-driven data increases the accuracy of classification models for CRT outcomes.