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

Atrioventricular optimization improves cardiac resynchronization response in patients with long interventricular electrical delays: A pooled analysis of the SMART-AV and SMART-CRT trials

BACKGROUND

The utility of atrioventricular (AV) optimization (AVO) algorithms remains in question. A substudy of the SMART-AV trial found that patients with prolonged interventricular delays ≥70 ms were more likely to benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with AVO. The SMART-CRT trial evaluated AVO on the basis of these results, but the study was underpowered.

OBJECTIVE

To increase statistical power, data from SMART-AV patients meeting the inclusion criterion of interventricular delay ≥70 ms were pooled with data from SMART-CRT to reassess AVO.

METHODS

SMART-CRT and SMART-AV were prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trials. Patients in both studies were randomized to be programmed with an AVO algorithm (SmartDelay) or fixed AV delay (120 ms). Paired echocardiograms obtained at baseline and 6 months were compared, with CRT response defined as ≥15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume.

RESULTS

A total of 451 complete patient data sets were pooled and analyzed. The baseline demographics between studies did not differ statistically in terms of age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, or left ventricular end-systolic volume. The AVO group had a greater proportion of CRT responders (SmartDelay, 73.9%; fixed, 63.1%; P = .014) and greater changes in measures of reverse remodeling. SmartDelay patients with a recommended sensed AV delay outside the nominal range (100-120 ms) had 2.3 greater odds of CRT response than fixed AV delay patients.

CONCLUSION

Greater CRT response and measures of reverse remodeling were observed in patients with SmartDelay enabled vs a fixed AV delay. This study supports the use of SmartDelay in patients with a CRT indication and interventricular delay ≥70 ms.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV REGISTRATION

NCT00677014 and NCT03089281.

Predictors for Super-Responders in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

BACKGROUND

Prediction of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response, particularly a super-response, is of great importance.

STUDY QUESTION

The aim of our study was to assess the predictors for super-responders in CRT.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective, observational study, which finally included 622 patients with heart failure treated with CRT between January 2008 and May 2020 who had a minimal follow-up of 6 months after CRT.

MEASURES AND OUTCOMES

A total of 192 super-responders, defined by a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of at least 45%, and/or minimum 15% increase in LVEF and an improvement of the New York Heart Association functional class by at least 2 degrees at the last follow-up, and the rest of 430 patients who did not fulfill the super-responder criteria.

RESULTS

The highest rate of super-responders (41.91%, n = 171) was at patients with left ventricle-only pacing with optimal fusion (OPT) compared with patients with biventricular (BiV) pacing (9.81%, n = 21, P < 0.000). In the OPT group, univariable analysis showed that nonischemic cardiomyopathy, a smaller degree of mitral regurgitation, and better left ventricle function at enrollment were predictors for super-response compared with the BiV group where a narrower QRS after implantation, nonischemic cardiomyopathy, and a better baseline LVEF were predictors for super-responders. In the multivariable analysis, both narrower QRS after implantation and nonischemic cardiomyopathy were independent predictors for super-response in the BiV group compared with OPT where nonischemic cardiomyopathy remained the only independent predictor for super-response.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective study, OPT CRT programing was an additional predictor of super-response to CRT besides nonischemic cardiomyopathy.

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.

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.

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.

The Interplay of PR Interval and AV Pacing Delays Used for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Heart Failure Patients: Association with Clinical Response in a Retrospective Analysis of a Large Observational Study

Background. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a treatment for heart failure (HF) patients with prolonged QRS and impaired left ventricular (LV) systolic function. We aim to evaluate how the baseline PR interval is associated with outcomes (all-cause death or HF hospitalizations) and LV reverse remodeling (>15% relative reduction in LV end-systolic volume). Methods. Among 2224 patients with CRT defibrillators, 1718 (77.2%) had a device programmed at out-of-the-box settings (sensed AV delay: 100 ms and paced AV delay: 130 ms). Results. In this cohort of 1718 patients (78.7% men, mean age 66 years, 71.6% in NYHA class III/IV, LVEF = 27 ± 6%), echocardiographic assessment at 6-month follow-up showed that LV reverse remodeling was not constant as a function of the PR interval; in detail, it occurred in 56.4% of all patients but was more frequent (76.6%) in patients with a PR interval of 160 ms. In a median follow-up of 20 months, the endpoint of death or HF hospitalizations occurred in 304/1718 (17.7%) patients; in the multivariable regression analysis it was significantly less frequent when the PR interval was between 150 and 170 ms (hazard ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63−0.99, p = 0.046). The same PR range was associated with higher probability of CRT response (odds ratio = 2.51, 95% CI: 1.41−4.47, p = 0.002). Conclusions. In a large population of CRT patients, with fixed AV pacing delays, specific PR intervals are associated with significant benefits in terms of LV reverse remodeling and lower morbidity. These observational data suggest the importance of optimizing pacing programming as a function of the PR interval to maximize CRT response and patient outcome.

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.

Programming Algorithms for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Current cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implant guidelines emphasize the presence of electrical dyssynchrony (left bundle branch block (LBBB) and QRS > 150 ms) yet have modest predictive value for response and have not reduced the 30% nonresponse rate. Optimized programming to optimize CRT delivery has promised much but to date has largely been ineffective. What is missing is the understanding of LV paced effects (which are unpredictable) and optimal paced AV interval (that can be conserved during physiologic variations) that then can be incorporated into an individualized programming prescription. Automatic device-based algorithms that deliver electrical optimization and maintain this during ambulatory fluctuations in AV interval are discussed.

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).

Device-based Optimization of Cardiac Resynchronization-One Size Does Not Fit All

We report on a 72-year-old female patient who was sent to our clinic for evaluation of a biventricular intracardiac defibrillator (BIV-ICD). The patient was diagnosed with ischemic cardiomyopathy and showed a persistently low ejection fraction in the range of 20%-25% with New York Heart Association class III heart failure symptoms despite being on guideline-directed medical therapy, including a β-blocker and a combination of sacubitril and valsartan, for >3 months. In addition, the patient had underlying right bundle branch block (RBBB) with a QRS duration of 160 ms. The device was programmed with a Sync-AV algorithm on with nominal settings (delta of -50 ms). The thresholds and lead impedances were acceptable. Electrocardiography was performed in the postoperative period, showing persistent RBBB similar to the baseline electrocardiogram without much QRS narrowing. In this report, we discuss the mechanism and troubleshooting of this problem.

Impact of anatomical reverse remodelling in the design of optimal quadripolar pacing leads: A computational study

Lead position is an important factor in determining response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) in dyssynchronous heart failure (HF) patients. Multipoint pacing (MPP) enables pacing from multiple electrodes within the same lead, improving the potential outcome for patients. Virtual quadripolar lead designs were evaluated by simulating pacing from all combinations of 1 and 2 electrodes along the lead in each virtual patient from cohorts of HF (n = 24) and simulated reverse remodelled (RR, n = 20) patients. Electrical synchrony was assessed by the time 90% of the ventricular myocardium is activated (AT090). Optimal 1 and 2 electrode pacing configurations for AT090 were combined to identify the 4-electrode lead design that maximised benefits across all patients. LV pacing in the HF cohort in all possible single and double electrode locations reduced AT090 by 14.48 ± 5.01 ms (11.92 ± 3.51%). The major determinant of reduction in activation time was patient anatomy. Pacing with a single optimal lead design reduced AT090 more in the HF cohort than the RR cohort (12.68 ± 3.29% vs 10.81 ± 2.34%). Pacing with a single combined HF and RR population-optimised lead design achieves electrical resynchronization with near equivalence to personalised lead designs both in HF and RR anatomies. These findings suggest that although lead configurations have to be tailored to each patient, a single optimal lead design is sufficient to obtain near-optimal results across most patients. This study shows the potential of virtual clinical trials as tools to compare existing and explore new lead designs.

Perioperative Sensor and Algorithm Programming in Patients with Implanted ICDs and Pacemakers for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: ICDs and pacemakers for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are complex devices with different sensors and automatic algorithms implanted in patients with advanced cardiac diseases. Data on the perioperative management and outcome of CRT carriers undergoing surgery unrelated to the device are scarce. Methods: Data from 198 CRT device carriers (100 with active rate responsive sensor) were evaluated regarding perioperative adverse (device-related) events (A(D)E) and lead parameter changes. Results: Thirty-nine adverse observations were documented in 180 patients during preoperative interrogation, which were most often related to the left-ventricular lead and requiring intervention/reprogramming in 22 cases (12%). Anesthesia-related events occurred in 69 patients. There was no ADE for non-cardiac surgery and in pacemaker-dependent patients not programmed to an asynchronous pacing mode. Post-operative device interrogation showed significant lead parameter changes in 64/179 patients (36%) requiring reprogramming in 29 cases (16%). Conclusion: The left-ventricular pacing lead represents the most vulnerable system component. Comprehensive pre and post-interventional device interrogation is mandatory to ensure proper system function. The type of ICD function suspension has no impact on each patient’s outcome. Precautionary activity sensor deactivation is not required for non-cardiac interventions. Routine prophylactic device reprogramming to asynchronous pacing appears inessential. Most of the CRT pacemakers do not require surgery-related reprogramming.

Very Long-Term Follow-Up in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Wider Paced QRS Equals Worse Prognosis

Background: Different electrocardiogram (ECG) findings are known to be independent predictors of clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). It remains unknown how these findings influence very long-term prognosis. Methods and Results: A total of 102 consecutive patients (75 males, mean age 65 ± 10 years) referred to our center for CRT implantation had previously been included in this prospective observational study. The same patient group was now re-evaluated for death from all causes over a prolonged median follow-up of 10.3 years (interquartile range 9.4–12.5 years). During follow-up, 55 patients died, and 82% of the clinical non-responders (n = 23) and 44% of the responders (n = 79) were deceased. We screened for univariate associations and found QRS width during biventricular (BIV) pacing (p = 0.02), left ventricular (LV) pacing (p < 0.01), Δ LV paced–right ventricular (RV) paced (p = 0.03), age (p = 0.03), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class (p < 0.01), CHA₂DS₂-Vasc score (p < 0.01), glomerular filtration rate (p < 0.01), coronary artery disease (p < 0.01), non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) (p = 0.01), arterial hypertension (p < 0.01), NT-proBNP (p < 0.01), and clinical response to CRT (p < 0.01) to be significantly associated with mortality. In the multivariate analysis, NICM, the lower NYHA class, and smaller QRS width during BIV pacing were independent predictors of better outcomes. Conclusion: Our data show that QRS width duration during biventricular pacing, an ECG parameter easily obtainable during LV lead placement, is an independent predictor of mortality in a long-term follow-up. Our data add further evidence that NICM and lower NYHA class are independent predictors for better outcome after CRT implantation.

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.

Association of QRS narrowing with response to cardiac resynchronization therapy-a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Prolonged QRS duration, which reflects a higher degree of mechanical dysynchrony, is a predictor of response to CRT. However, the association of QRS narrowing after biventricular pacing with CRT response rates is not clear. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between QRS narrowing after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and clinical and echocardiographic response to CRT in patients with heart failure. Two independent investigators searched MedLine and EMBASE databases through July 2018 without any limitations. Studies providing estimates (continuous data) on the association of QRS shortening with either clinical (defined as New York Heart Association (NYHA) reduction ≥ 1) or echocardiographic (defined as left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) reduction ≥ 15%) response to CRT were finally included in the quantitative synthesis. We included 32 studies (14 studies (1274 patients mean age 64 years old, males 79.3%) using clinical CRT response and 18 studies (1270 patients, mean age 64 years old, males 69.1%) using echocardiographic CRT response). A significant association between QRS narrowing and shorter attained QRS duration with clinical and echocardiographic CRT response was observed. The observed association was independent of the timing of QRS width measurement after CRT implantation. Acute and late improvement of electrical dysynchrony as depicted by QRS narrowing following biventricular pacing is associated with clinical and echocardiographic response to CRT. However, large prospective studies are needed to further examine our findings.

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.

Gain in real-world cardiac resynchronization therapy efficacy with SyncAV dynamic optimization: Heart failure hospitalizations and costs

BACKGROUND

SyncAV, a device-based cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) algorithm, promotes electrical optimization by dynamically adjusting atrioventricular intervals.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of SyncAV on heart failure hospitalizations (HFHs) and related costs in a real-world CRT cohort.

METHODS

Patients with SyncAV-capable CRT devices followed by remote monitoring and enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service for at least 1 year preimplant and up to 2 years postimplant were studied. Patients with SyncAV OFF were 4:1 matched to those with SyncAV ON on preimplant HFH rate, demographics, comorbidities, disease etiology, and left bundle branch block. HFHs were determined from the primary diagnosis of inpatient hospitalizations, and the cost for each event was the sum of Medicare, supplemental insurance, and patient payment.

RESULTS

After 4:1 propensity score matching, 3630 patients were studied (mean age 75 ± 8 years; 1386 [38%] female), including 726 (25%) patients with SyncAV ON. The pre-CRT HFH rate was 0.338 HFH events per patient-year. Overall, CRT diminished the HFH rate to 0.204 events per patient-year (P < .001). SyncAV elicited a larger reduction in HFH rate (SyncAV ON: hazard ratio [HR] 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.66; P < .001 and SyncAV OFF: HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.59-0.77; P < .001). After 2 years, the HFH rate was lower in the SyncAV ON group than in the SyncAV OFF group (0.143 HFHs per patient-year vs 0.193 HFHs per patient-year; HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.55-0.89; P = .003) and fewer HFHs were followed by 30-day HFH readmissions (4.41% vs 7.68%; P = .003) and 30-day all-cause hospital readmissions (7.04% vs 10.01%; P = .010). The total 2-year HFH-associated costs per patient were lower with SyncAV ON (difference $1135; 90% CI $93-$2109; P = .038).

CONCLUSION

This large, real-world, propensity score-matched study demonstrates that SyncAV CRT is associated with significantly reduced HFHs and associated costs, incremental to standard CRT.

Optimizing lead placement for pacing in dyssynchronous heart failure: The patient in the lead

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) greatly reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. However, despite tremendous efforts, response has been variable and can be further improved. Although optimizing left ventricular lead placement (LVLP) is arguably the cornerstone of CRT, the procedure of LVLP using the transvenous approach has remained largely unchanged for more than 2 decades. Improvements have been developed using scar location and electrical and/or mechanical mapping, and interest in conduction system pacing as an alternative to biventricular pacing has emerged recently. Conduction system pacing is promising but may not be suitable for all patients with dyssynchronous heart failure. This review underscores the importance of a patient-tailored approach and discusses the potential applications of both conduction system pacing and targeted biventricular CRT.

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.

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.

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.

Septal contraction predicts acute haemodynamic improvement and paced QRS width reduction in cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

Three distinct septal contraction patterns typical for left bundle branch block may be assessed using echocardiography in heart failure patients scheduled for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of this study was to explore the association between these septal contraction patterns and the acute haemodynamic and electrical response to biventricular pacing (BIVP) in patients undergoing CRT implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty-eight CRT candidates underwent speckle tracking echocardiography prior to device implantation. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether their septal contraction pattern was indicative of dyssynchrony (premature septal contraction followed by various amount of stretch) or not (normally timed septal contraction with minimal stretch). CRT implantation was performed under invasive left ventricular (LV) pressure monitoring and we defined acute CRT response as ≥10% increase in LV dP/dtmax. End-diastolic pressure (EDP) and QRS width served as a diastolic and electrical parameter, respectively. LV dP/dtmax improved under BIVP (737 ± 177 mmHg/s vs. 838 ± 199 mmHg/s, P < 0.001) and 26 patients (68%) were defined as acute CRT responders. Patients with premature septal contraction (n = 27) experienced acute improvement in systolic (ΔdP/dtmax: 18.3 ± 8.9%, P < 0.001), diastolic (ΔEDP: -30.6 ± 29.9%, P < 0.001) and electrical (ΔQRS width: -23.3 ± 13.2%, P < 0.001) parameters. No improvement under BIVP was observed in patients (n = 11) with normally timed septal contraction (ΔdP/dtmax: 4.0 ± 7.8%, P = 0.12; ΔEDP: -8.8 ± 38.4%, P = 0.47 and ΔQRS width: -0.9 ± 11.4%, P = 0.79).

CONCLUSION

Septal contraction patterns are an excellent predictor of acute CRT response. Only patients with premature septal contraction experienced acute systolic, diastolic, and electrical improvement under BIVP.

LV only pacing-mediated electrical storm with cardiac resynchronization therapy managed by simultaneous biventricular pacing

Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) is a rare complication of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Little is known about ventricular proarrhythmia related to the pacing vector of CRT. This case report describes the elimination of ventricular arrythmia using biventricular pacing in a patient with VT-storm related to LV only pacing as part of the AdaptivCRT algorithm (Medtronic Inc). Simultaneous biventricular pacing was effective in eliminating polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. Changing the pacing vector is a noninvasive treatment strategy that should be considered to manage VA due to CRT.

Electrical Reverse Remodeling of the Native Cardiac Conduction System after Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: Little is known about electrical remodeling of the native conduction systems, particularly how the PR interval changes, after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We investigated the effects of CRT on the intrinsic PR interval (i-PRi) and QRS duration (i-QRSd). Methods and results: In 100 consecutive CRT recipients with sinus rhythm and long-term follow-up (>1 year), the i-PRi and i-QRSd were measured at baseline and at the last echocardiographic follow-up (33.4 ± 17.9 months) with biventricular pacing temporarily withdrawn. The relative decrease in the left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) was measured to define CRT-responders (≥15%) and super-responders (≥30%). Following CRT, the left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction increased significantly (p < 0.001). In CRT-responders (n = 71), the LVESV and i-QRSd decreased markedly (170 ± 39 to 159 ± 24 ms, p = 0.012). However, the i-PRi was not shortened with CRT response and was actually likely to increase, even in the super-responder group (n = 33). Moreover, lengthening of the i-PRi was observed consistently irrespective of the CRT response status, beta-blocker use, or amiodarone use. CRT non-responders were associated with a remarkable PR prolongation (p = 0.005) and QRS widening (p = 0.001), along with positive ventricular remodeling. Conclusion: LV volume and i-QRSd decreased markedly with CRT response. However, the i-PRi was not shortened, but rather increased regardless of the degree of CRT response. CRT non-response was associated with a considerable increase in the i-PRi and i-QRSd, along with positive ventricular remodeling. CRT-induced electrical reverse remodeling might occur preferentially in the intraventricular, but not the atrioventricular, conduction system.

Interrelationships between interventricular electrical delays in cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

In cardiac resynchronization therapy, pacing the left ventricle (LV) at sites of prolonged electrical delay is associated with better outcomes. We sought to characterize the interrelationships between intrinsic, right-ventricular (RV)-paced, and LV-paced interventricular delays.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The following electrical timings were measured at implantation for all electrodes of the LV quadripolar leads: QLV, interventricular delay in intrinsic rhythm (RVs-LVs), in RV-paced rhythm (RVp-LVs), and in LV-paced rhythm (LVp-RVs). We included 32 patients (78% men, age 72 years, LV ejection fraction 29%, left bundle branch block 84%). QLV and RVs-LVs were correlated (R²  = .72, p < .0001), as were RVs-LVs and RVp-LVs (R²  = .27, p = .002) and RVp-LVs and LVp-RVs (R²  = .60, p < .001). Direction of activation along the four LV lead electrodes was concordant between RVs-LVs and RVp-LVs in only 17 (53%) patients. The latest-activated electrodes in RVs-LVs and RVp-LVs were concordant in 26 (81%) patients, adjacent in 3 (9%) patients, and remote in 3 (9%) patients. Biventricular-paced QRS duration varied by more than 10 ms between the two electrodes in half of the patients with dissimilar latest electrodes. Among the seven echocardiographic nonresponders at 6 months, the programmed electrode was remote from the latest electrode in RVs-LVs in five patients and in RVp-LVs in three patients.

CONCLUSION

Intrinsic and RV-paced interventricular electrical delays are correlated, but there is substantial heterogeneity between patients. The latest-activated electrode may be different between RVs-LVs and RVp-LVs, and this might have important implications in selecting the optimal LV vector.

Left ventricular paced activation in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients with left bundle branch block and relationship to its electrical substrate

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) uses left ventricular (LV) pacing to restore rapid synchronized LV activation when it is delayed in patients with myocardial disease.

Objective

Although intrinsic LV activation delays are understood, little is known about reactions to LV stimulation and whether they are affected by QRS duration (QRSd), morphology, LV substrate, or choice of electrode pair. The purpose of this study was to test these interactions.

Methods

In 120 heart failure patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and QRS >120 ms receiving CRT with quadripolar LV leads, device-based measurements of intrinsic activation delay (qLV) and paced inter- (and intra-) LV conduction times were evaluated at the proximal and distal LV bipoles.

Results

During intrinsic conduction, qLV varied little between the proximal and distal pairs in patients with LBBB (n = 120; age 68 ± 11 years; 63% male; ejection fraction 25% ± 7%; 33% ischemic cardiomyopathy; QRSd 162 ± 19 ms). A minority (30%) had conduction barriers (ie, gradients) (ΔqLV 29 ± 8 ms vs 9 ± 5 ms in patients without gradients; P <.01), which occurred equally in ischemic and nonischemic patients. A majority were functional (and not scar-mediated), as they resolved with pacing in most patients (75%). Importantly, LV-paced conduction times were unrelated to baseline QRS morphology (LBBB 166 ± 30 ms vs RBBB control 172 ± 30 ms; P = NS), longer than intrinsic conduction (166 ± 30 ms vs 129 ± 28 ms; P <.01), and varied significantly by electrode pair (ie, small distances) and etiology. Correlation between intrinsic activation delay (qLV) and LV-paced conduction time was poor (R² = 0.278; P <.05).

Conclusion

LV-paced effect, which is core to CRT, is unpredictable based on conventionally used measures and should be considered during CRT optimization.

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.

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.

Improving Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy

CRT is a cornerstone of therapy for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. By restoring left ventricular (LV) electrical and mechanical synchrony, CRT can reduce mortality, improve LV function and reduce heart failure symptoms. Since its introduction, many advances have been made that have improved the delivery of and enhanced the response to CRT. Improving CRT outcomes begins with proper patient selection so CRT is delivered to all populations that could benefit from it, and limiting the implantation of CRT in those with a small chance of response. In addition, advancements in LV leads and delivery technologies coupled with multimodality imaging and electrical mapping have enabled operators to place coronary sinus leads in locations that will optimise electrical and mechanical synchrony. Finally, new pacing strategies using LV endocardial pacing or His bundle pacing have allowed for CRT delivery and improved response in patients with poor coronary sinus anatomy or lack of response to traditional CRT.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy reprogramming to improve electrical synchrony in patients with existing devices

BACKGROUND

Optimal programming of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has not yet been fully elucidated. A novel algorithm (SyncAV) has been developed to improve electrical synchrony by fusion of the triple wavefronts: intrinsic, right ventricular (RV)-paced, and left ventricular (LV)-paced.

METHODS

Consecutive patients at a single tertiary care center with a previously implanted CRT device with SyncAV algorithm (programmable negative AV hysteresis) were evaluated. QRS duration (QRSd) was measured during 1) intrinsic conduction, 2) existing CRT pacing as chronically programmed by treating physician, 3) using the device-based QuickOpt™ algorithm for optimization of AV and VV delays, and 4) ECG-based optimized SyncAV programming. The paced QRSd was assessed and compared to intrinsic conduction and between the different modes of programming.

RESULTS

Of 64 consecutive, potentially eligible patients who underwent assessment, 34 patients who were able to undergo SyncAV programming were included. Mean intrinsic conduction QRSd was 163 ± 24 ms. In comparison, the mean QRSd was 152 ± 25 ms (-11.1 ± 19.0) during existing CRT pacing, 160 ± 25 ms (-4.1 ± 25.2) using the QuickOpt™ algorithm and 138 ± 23 (-24.9 ± 17.2) using ECG-based optimized SyncAV programming. SyncAV optimization resulted in significant reductions in QRSd compared to existing CRT pacing (P = 0.02) and QuickOpt™ (P < 0.001). Of the 32% of patients who did not have QRS narrowing with existing CRT, 72% experienced QRS narrowing with SyncAV.

CONCLUSION

ECG-based atrio-ventricular delay optimization using SyncAV significantly improved electrical synchrony in patients with a previously implanted CRT. Further studies are needed to assess the impact on long-term outcomes.

Efficacy of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Automated Dynamic Optimization and Left Ventricular-only Pacing

BACKGROUND

Although device-based optimization has been developed to overcome the limitations of conventional optimization methods in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), few real-world data supports the results of clinical trials that showed the efficacy of automatic optimization algorithms. We investigated whether CRT using the adaptive CRT algorithm is comparable to non-adaptive biventricular (BiV) pacing optimized with electrocardiogram or echocardiography-based methods.

METHODS

Consecutive 155 CRT patients were categorized into 3 groups according to the optimization methods: non-adaptive BiV (n = 129), adaptive BiV (n = 11), and adaptive left ventricular (LV) pacing (n = 15) groups. Additionally, a subgroup of patients (n = 59) with normal PR interval and left bundle branch block (LBBB) was selected from the non-adaptive BiV group. The primary outcomes included cardiac death, heart transplantation, LV assist device implantation, and heart failure admission. Secondary outcomes were electromechanical reverse remodeling and responder rates at 6 months after CRT.

RESULTS

During a median 27.5-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in primary outcomes among the 3 groups. However, there was a trend toward better outcomes in the adaptive LV group compared to the other groups. In a more rigorous comparisons among the patients with normal PR interval and LBBB, similar patterns were still observed.

CONCLUSION

In our first Asian-Pacific real-world data, automated dynamic CRT optimization showed comparable efficacy to conventional methods regarding clinical outcomes and electromechanical remodeling.