The frequency of electrodes replacement in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronizaton therapy during long term follow up

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an effective method of treatment in patients with HF, but as complex device with three electrodes, it is prone to electrode dysfunctions and the need to replace them. However little is known about the frequency of need for leads replacement in subjects undergone CRT in a very long-term follow up.

Aim

To determine the frequency of leads replacement in patients undergoing CRT during long term follow-up.

Methods

Study population consisted of 1059 consecutive patients with CRT implanted between 2002 and 2019 in tertiary care university hospital, in a densely inhabited, urban region of Poland. The data about lead replacement was collected.

Results

During the median follow-up of 1661 days (IQR: 815–2792) for non-infectious reasons (dislocation, dysfunction, fracture etc.) a total of 324 leads in 251 patients (23.7%) were replaced. Median time from CRT implantation to the first lead replacement was 359 days (42–1413). The electrode replacement within first year after CRT implantation was performed in 126 subjects (50.2%), in the rest of patients (49.8%) the leads were replaced after one year of device implantation. In patients with above ten years of follow up (n=143; 13.5%) 67 subjects (46.8%) had one or more lead replacement during follow up.

Patients with electrode replacement during follow-up were younger (63 vs 66 years, P<0.001), more often with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (52.6% vs 41.6%, P=0.002), less often with permanent atrial fibrillation (12.4% vs 24.4%, P<0.001) and had higher left ventricle end-diastolic diameter (68 vs 67 mm, P=0.02). The duration of the first CRT device implantation were longer with higher fluoroscopy time in comparison with patients without lead replacement during follow up (135 vs 120 min, P<0.001 and 20.5 vs 16 min, P<0.001, respectively) and these were an independent predictors of lead replacement during FU (HR 1.002, 95% CI 1.000–1.006, P=0.03 and HR 1.005, 95% CI 1.002–1.008, P<0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

The need for leads replacement due to non-infectious reasons reaches almost 25% of patients with CRT within 4.5 years. Half of the patients have lead replacement within one year after CRT implantation and the other half during long term follow up. The duration of the first procedure (CRT device implantation) is strong predictor of lead replacement during follow up.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

10-year outcomes of triple-site versus standard cardiac resynchronization therapy randomized trial (TRUST CRT)

Background

Triple-Site versus Standard Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Randomized Trial (TRUST CRT) was initiated in 2009 to verify the hypothesis whether triple-site (single right, double left) cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) may be superior to conventional, biventricular resynchronization in patients with advanced heart failure.

Objectives

To report 6-month outcomes and 10-year survival in TRUST CRT.

Methods

100 consecutive patients with moderate to severe heart failure, ejection fraction of 35% or less, electrical and mechanical dyssynchrony, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 fashion to triple-site CRT defibrillator (TRIV) or to conventional CRT-D. The primary objective evaluated response-rate, defined as the 6-month's combined end point of alive status, freedom from hospitalization for heart failure or heart transplantation, relative≥10% increase in ejection fraction, ≥10% in peak oxygen consumption, and ≥10% in 6-minute walking distance. The secondary objective was to assess the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (hospitalization for exacerbated heart failure requiring modification of pharmacotherapy, heart transplant or death) at month 6 and during remote observation.

Results

At month 6, the response-rate was higher in triple-site than conventional CRT-D group (51.1 vs. 26.5%, P=0.014). There were 2 deaths or heart failure events in the triple-site group (4%) as compared with 8 in the group assigned to conventional CRT-D (16%). A triple-site resynchronization resulted in 12% absolute risk reduction for secondary end point (hazard ratio 0.25; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.05 to 1.17, P=0.056, in comparison with the conventional CRT-D group). After 10 years of observation (median follow up of 7.1 years; range: 1.2–10.4) 57 patients (58.2%) died: 24 (53.3%) in the triple-site group, 31 (60.8%) in the conventional group (P=0.46) and 2 patients with and ICD (failed CRT implantation) [Figure].

Conclusions

In patients with advanced heart failure, triple-site resynchronization combined with an ICD did not result in better survival than conventional resynchronization therapy in a median observation of 7.1 years.

Figure 1

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: None

854Predictors of ventricular tachyarrhythmia in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and non-ischaemic systolic heart failure

Funding Acknowledgements

none

OnBehalf

none

Background

The benefit of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with ischaemic heart failure (HF) has been well proven but the benefit of ICD in subjects with non-ischaemic systolic HF is less well-established. Consequently, there is very limited evidence which patients with non-ischaemic HF would benefit most from receiving an ICD.

Aim

To determine the incidence and predictors of ventricular arrhythmia in patients with ICD and non-ischaemic systolic HF.

Methods

Study population consisted of 420 consecutive patients with ICD and non-ischaemic systolic HF monitored remotely (on a daily basis) between 2010 and 2017 in tertiary care university hospital, in a densely inhabited, urban region of Poland. Sixty-six percentage of patients had cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D).

Results

During the median follow-up of 1645 days (range: 507-3515) sustained ventricular arrhythmia occurred in 100 patients (23.8%). Of those, ventricular fibrillation (VF), ventricular tachycardia (VT) or VT/VF (combined) occurred in 10 (10.0%), 77 (77.0%) and 13 (13.0%) patients, respectively. Patients with versus without ventricular arrhythmia did differ with respect to baseline variables such as: left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) - median of 67 mm [49-82] vs 62 mm [46-78]; post-inflammatory HF (17 vs 9.7%, P = 0.045); atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter - AF/AFL (57 vs. 38.1%, P = 0.0009); supraventricular arrhythmia (SVT) - any supraventricular arrythmia >100/min other than AF/AFL (27 vs. 15.9%, P = 0.01); and left ventricular ejection fraction - EF (25 vs. 28%, P = 0.01). No differences were observed for age, sex, NYHA class, mitral regurgitation, common comorbidities (including diabetes and chronic renal disease) or concomitant medications. On  multivariable regression analysis, LVEDD (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.004-1.09, P = 0.03), AF/AFL (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.21-2.72, P = 0.004) and SVT (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.21-3.01, P = 0.006) were identified as independent predictors of sustained ventricular arrhythmia in patients with ICD and non-ischaemic HF. All-cause mortality in patients with VT/VF was significantly higher than in subjects without sustained ventricular arrhythmias (33% vs. 20%, P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Ventricular arrhythmia occurred in 23.8% of patients with systolic non-ischaemic HF during 4.5 years of observation and was associated with significantly worse prognosis compared with subjects free of VT/VF. Left ventricular dimension, atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter and supraventricular tachycardia were identified as independent predictors for ventricular arrhythmia.