Optimierte CRT-Programmierung

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can result in significant clinical improvement in patients with congestive heart failure. Non-response to CRT might be attributable to suboptimal programming. Follow-up has to ensure effective left ventricular (LV) stimulation at rest and also sufficient exercise-dependent atrial rates. Rate adaptive pacing is required in case of chronotropic incompetence. Specific algorithms may help to restore biventricular pacing or the enhance biventricular pacing rate when intrinsic AV conduction occurs, e.g., during intermittent atrial fibrillation. An individual adaptation of the AV interval is essential to achieve maximal benefit from resynchronization. Optimized AV interval programming synchronizes atrial and ventricular contraction, maximizing the atrial contribution to LV diastolic filling and preventing presystolic mitral regurgitation. Interventricular synchrony and LV contraction might be further harmonized by VV interval adaptation, although the impact of VV optimization on CRT outcome is still under debate. Non-invasive methods of AV and VV interval optimization by electro- and echocardiography are discussed.     

Ventricular contraction abnormalities in dilated cardiomyopathy: effect of biventricular pacing to correct interventricular dyssynchrony

OBJECTIVE: To measure ventricular contractile synchrony in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and to evaluate the effects of biventricular pacing on contractile synchrony and ejection fraction. BACKGROUND: Dilated cardiomyopathy is characterized by abnormal ventricular activation and contraction. Biventricular pacing may promote a more coordinated ventricular contraction pattern in these patients. We hypothesized that biventricular pacing would improve synchrony of right ventricular and left ventricular (RV/LV) contraction, resulting in improved ventricular ejection fraction. METHODS: Thirteen patients with DCM and intraventricular conduction delay underwent multiple gated equilibrium blood pool scintigraphy. Phase image analysis was applied to the scintigraphic data and mean phase angles computed for the RV and LV. Phase measures of interventricular (RV/LV) synchrony were computed in sinus rhythm and during atrial sensed biventricular pacing (BiV). RESULTS: The degree of interventricular dyssynchrony present in normal sinus rhythm correlated with LV ejection fraction (r = -0.69, p < 0.01). During BiV, interventricular contractile synchrony improved overall from 27.5 +/- 23.1 degrees to 14.1 +/- 13 degrees (p = 0.01). The degree of interventricular dyssynchrony present in sinus rhythm correlated with the magnitude of improvement in synchrony during BiV (r = 0.83, p < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction increased in all thirteen patients during BiV, from 17.2 +/- 7.9% to 22.5 +/- 8.3% (p < 0.0001) and correlated significantly with improvement in RV/LV synchrony during BiV (r = 0.86, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Dilated cardiomyopathy with intraventricular conduction delay is associated with significant interventricular dyssynchrony. Improvements in interventricular synchrony during biventricular pacing correlate with acute improvements in LV ejection fraction.     

Left ventricular resynchronization predicted by individual performance of right and left univentricular pacing: A study on the impact of sequential biventricular pacing on ventricular dyssynchrony

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that improvement in left ventricular (LV) mechanical dyssynchrony is correlated with LV functional recovery in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Recent studies have suggested that sequential biventricular pacing may be important for further optimizing parameters of ventricular dyssynchrony. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acute effect of varying sequential biventricular pacing settings on echocardiographic parameters of ventricular dyssynchrony and to identify predictors of the optimal setting. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients referred for CRT were evaluated with standard echocardiography and tissue Doppler imaging before and after implantation. Indices of interventricular and intraventricular dyssynchrony were assessed for trends during simultaneous and sequential biventricular pacing. RESULTS: Twelve patients (41%) demonstrated linear trends of decreasing systolic dyssynchrony index with increasing LV preactivation. The mean additional decrease in dyssynchrony index at the optimized setting compared with simultaneous biventricular pacing was 26% (P <.04). Twenty-two patients (76%) demonstrated linear trends to decreasing interventricular dyssynchrony with increasing LV preactivation. The trends were strongly correlated with the magnitude of difference of the respective dyssynchrony measures in right ventricular only and LV only univentricular pacing. A significantly, superior capacity of LV only pacing for ventricular resynchronization was found in this subgroup of patients. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing CRT, differences in the performance of univentricular pacing are associated with linear trends in ventricular dyssynchrony parameters in sequential biventricular pacing. Quantitative differences in LV univentricular pacing impact on the capacity of biventricular pacing to correct ventricular dyssynchrony.     

Electrocardiographic Follow‐Up of Biventricular Pacemakers

Multisite pacing for the treatment of heart failure has added a new dimension to the electrocardiographic evaluation of device function. During left ventricular (LV) pacing from the appropriate site in the coronary venous system, a correctly positioned lead V1 registers a right bundle branch block pattern with few exceptions. During biventricular stimulation associated with right ventricular (RV) apical pacing, the QRS is often positive in lead V1. The frontal plane QRS axis is usually in the right superior quadrant and occasionally in the left superior quadrant. Barring incorrect placement of lead V1 (too high on the chest), lack of LV capture, LV lead displacement or marked latency (exit block or delay from the stimulation site), ventricular fusion with the spontaneous QRS complex, a negative QRS complex in lead V1 during biventricular pacing involving the RV apex probably reflects different activation of an heterogeneous biventricular substrate (ischemia, scar, His‐Purkinje participation in view of the varying patterns of LV activation in spontaneous left bundle branch block) and does not necessarily indicate a poor (electrical or mechanical) contribution from LV stimulation. In this situation, it is imperative to rule out the presence of coronary venous pacing via the middle cardiac vein or even unintended placement of two leads in the RV. During biventricular pacing with the RV lead in the outflow tract, the paced QRS in lead V1 is often negative and the frontal plane paced QRS axis is often directed to the right inferior quadrant (right axis deviation). In patients with sinus rhythm and a relatively short PR interval, ventricular fusion with competing native conduction during biventricular pacing may cause misinterpretation of the ECG because narrowing of the paced QRS complex simulates appropriate biventricular capture. This represents a common pitfall in device follow‐up. Elimination of ventricular fusion by shortening the AV delay, is often associated with clinical improvement. Anodal stimulation may complicate threshold testing and should not be misinterpreted as pacemaker malfunction. One must be cognizant of the various disturbances that can disrupt 1:1 atrial tracking and cause loss of ventricular resynchronization. (1) Upper rate response. The upper rate response of biventricular pacemakers differs from the traditional Wenckebach upper rate response of conventional antibradycardia pacemakers because heart failure patients generally do not have sinus bradycardia or AV junctional conduction delay. The programmed upper rate should be sufficiently fast to avoid loss of resynchronization in situations associated with sinus tachycardia. (2) Below the programmed upper rate. This may be caused by a variety of events (especially ventricular premature complexes and favored by the presence of first‐degree AV block) that alter the timing of sensed and paced events. In such cases, atrial events become trapped into the postventricular atrial refractory period at atrial rates below the programmed upper rate in the presence of spontaneous AV conduction. Algorithms are available to restore resynchronization by automatic temporary abbreviation of the postventricular atrial refractory period.     

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy—Emerging Therapeutic Approaches

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important therapeutic tool in the management of patients with heart failure and electrical dyssynchrony. In appropriately selected patients, landmark randomized controlled trials have demonstrated morbidity and mortality benefit beyond standard goal-directed medical therapy. Current guidelines emphasize the greatest clinical efficacy of CRT in patients with symptomatic heart failure, left bundle branch block, and wide QRS duration (>?150 ms). Other relevant considerations include the presence of atrial fibrillation, the presence of AV block, the etiology of cardiomyopathy, the presence of masked left-sided conduction delay, and the impact of comorbidities that might predict poor clinical response. At the time of CRT implantation, key considerations include targeting of the left ventricular (LV) lead to sites of greatest electrical and/or mechanical delay, the use of quadripolar versus bipolar LV pacing leads, evaluation of multiple pacing vectors to maximize electrical resynchronization, and in select instances pre-procedure imaging of the coronary venous anatomy to help guide decision-making at the time implant. Post-implant care includes the selective use of atrio-ventricular and inter-ventricular optimization algorithms, mitigation of right ventricular pacing, recognition, and treatment of suboptimal biventricular pacing, as well as management by a multi-disciplinary team of cardiovascular specialists. Emerging therapeutic strategies for patients eligible for CRT include the use of endocardial LV pacing, novel LV pacing options including multi-point pacing, His bundle pacing, and the integration of remote monitoring platforms that may identify patients at risk for clinical worsening.     

Variegated left ventricular electrical activation in response to a novel quadripolar electrode: Visualization by non-invasive electrocardiographic imaging

Improving response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) remains challenging. Appropriate candidates may be identified by the presence of left ventricular (LV) conduction delay. An additional determinant may be the electrical effect elicited by LV pacing, which may vary among and within individuals. However, this is little explored, reflecting the lack of means for both easily altering lead position in any individual patient and of rapidly assessing its electrical effects. However, the advent of both multipolar LV electrodes and non-invasive single-beat electroanatomic mapping potentially resolves these challenges. These were investigated here. Results confirmed wide variations in electrical responses to LV pacing. In any individual patient, different pacing configurations elicited different electrical effects. Conversely, any one stimulation vector produced different effects in different patients. Thus, the reaction of electrical substrate to LV pacing is inconsistent. This observation introduces an added level of complexity in the understanding CRT electrical action. Attention to this factor may influence response to electrical resynchronization therapy.     

Identification of the right ventricular pacing site for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) guided by electroanatomical mapping (CARTO).

BACKGROUND: The optimal left ventricle (LV) pacing site for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been investigated, but less is known about the optimal site in the right ventricle (RV). The present study examined whether electrical resynchronization guided by electroanatomical mapping (CARTO) results in mechanical resynchronization. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study group included 13 patients indicated for CRT: 10 with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, 2 with ischemic cardiomyopathy and 1 with cardiac sarcoidosis, (mean LV ejection fraction: 32+/-10%). CARTO of the RV septum was performed to identify the site with the most delayed conduction time during LV pacing. Hemodynamic measurements were performed during conventional biventricular pacing with the RV apex and LV (C-BVP) and during biventricular pacing with the most delayed site of the RV (d-RV) and LV (D-BVP). Lead placement at 15 coronary sinus veins was examined in the 13 patients. During pacing from anterolateral veins (n=2), the d-RV was the RV apex (RVA) in 1 patient and the mid-septum in the other. During pacing from lateral veins (n=9), the d-RV comprised the RVA (n=3), the mid-septum (n=5), and the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) (n=1). During pacing from the posterolateral veins (n=3), the d-RV was the RVOT in all cases. In 11 of 15 sites, d-RV differed from conventional RVA. Compared with C-BVP, D-BVP produced a significant improvement in LV dp/dt. Furthermore, RV mid-septum and LV pacing markedly increased LV dp/dt and pulse pressure (PP), but RVOT and LV pacing did not. D-BVP vs C-BVP: %LV dp/dt 30+/-20 and 15+/-15%, p<0.05; RV mid-septum and LV pacing vs C-BVP: %LV dp/dt 35+/-20 and 10+/-15%, p<0.02, and vs PP 33+/-20 and 10+/-29 mmHg, p<0.02. CONCLUSIONS: For pacing from the LV lateral vein, potential improvement of cardiac performance compared with that by conventional RVA placement may be realized with concomitant pacing from the d-RV (mid-septum).     

Effect of scar and His–Purkinje and myocardium conduction on response to conduction system pacing

Introduction

Conduction system pacing (CSP), in the form of His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch pacing (LBBP), is emerging as a valuable cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) delivery method. However, patient selection and therapy personalization for CSP delivery remain poorly characterized. We aim to compare pacing-induced electrical synchrony during CRT, HBP, LBBP, HBP with left ventricular (LV) epicardial lead (His-optimized CRT [HOT-CRT]), and LBBP with LV epicardial lead (LBBP-optimized CRT [LOT-CRT]) in patients with different conduction disease presentations using computational modeling.

Methods

We simulated ventricular activation on 24 four-chamber heart geometries, including His–Purkinje systems with proximal left bundle branch block (LBBB). We simulated septal scar, LV lateral wall scar, and mild and severe myocardium and LV His–Purkinje system conduction disease by decreasing the conduction velocity (CV) down to 70% and 35% of the healthy CV. Electrical synchrony was measured by the shortest interval to activate 90% of the ventricles (90% of biventricular activation time [BIVAT-90]).

Results

Severe LV His–Purkinje conduction disease favored CRT (BIVAT-90: HBP 101.5 ± 7.8 ms vs. CRT 93.0 ± 8.9 ms, p < .05), with additional electrical synchrony induced by HOT-CRT (87.6 ± 6.7 ms, p < .05) and LOT-CRT (73.9 ± 7.6 ms, p < .05). Patients with slow myocardium CV benefit more from CSP compared to CRT (BIVAT-90: CRT 134.5 ± 24.1 ms; HBP 97.1 ± 9.9 ms, p < .01; LBBP: 101.5 ± 10.7 ms, p < .01). Septal but not lateral wall scar made CSP ineffective, while CRT was able to resynchronize the ventricles in the presence of septal scar (BIVAT-90: baseline 119.1 ± 10.8 ms vs. CRT 85.1 ± 14.9 ms, p < .01).

Conclusion

Severe LV His–Purkinje conduction disease attenuates the benefits of CSP, with additional improvements achieved with HOT-CRT and LOT-CRT. Septal but not lateral wall scars make CSP ineffective.     

Biventricular pacing: impact on exercise-induced increases in mitral insufficiency in patients with chronic heart failure

INTRODUCTION:

Mitral regurgitation (MR) in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients frequently worsens with exercise. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces MR at rest, but its effects on exercise-induced worsening of MR are incompletely explored. The present study examined the influence of CRT on MR during submaximal exercise in CHF patients.

METHODS:

Eleven patients with CHF who were treated with CRT underwent echocardiography while performing steady-state exercise during four conduction modes (intrinsic rhythm, right ventricular [RV], biventricular [BiV] and left ventricular [LV] pacing). Measurements of MR were jet area planimetry, effective regurgitant orifice area, peak MR flow rate and regurgitant volume.

RESULTS:

At rest and during exercise, there were no differences in dyssynchrony between intrinsic rhythm and RV pacing. BiV and LV pacing reduced dyssynchrony at rest and during exercise compared with intrinsic conduction and RV pacing, and there were no differences in the magnitude of these effects between these two pacing modes. At rest, RV pacing increased MR compared with intrinsic conduction (MR regurgitant volume; P<0.05), whereas BiV and LV pacing reduced MR (reductions in effective regurgitant orifice area and jet area; P<0.02, and MR flow rate; P<0.05 with BiV pacing from intrinsic conduction). MR significantly increased on exercise with intrinsic rhythm and RV pacing, whereas with LV and BiV pacing, there were no significant exercise-induced increases in any MR variable. There were relationships between changes in measures of dyssynchrony and reductions in MR at rest and during exercise.

CONCLUSIONS:

CRT reduces MR at rest and during exercise, and prevents exercise-induced MR. Reductions in MR during exercise correlate with improvements in dyssynchrony.     

Physiology of cardiac resynchronization

Dyssynchronous ventricular contraction, often associated with delayed electrical activation, contributes to worsened clinical status in patients with chronic dilated heart failure. There are three levels of impaired electromechanical synchrony that can be recognized and potentially improved with pacing methods. Prolonged atrioventricular (AV) delay can promote presystolic mitral regurgitation and impaired left ventricular (LV) filling. Interventricular conduction delay with right ventricular (RV) activation preceding LV activation often occurs in the setting of left bundle branch block or RV apical pacing, and can result in impeded LV filling and ejection. Activation delays within the LV itself (intraventricular dyssynchrony) can cause decreased efficiency of contraction, increased mitral regurgitation, and abnormal ventricular remodeling. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can improve ventricular performance in two thirds of patients selected based on QRS duration alone. Improved understanding of the pathophysiology of cardiac dyssynchrony will aid in patient selection and in assessment and optimization of response to CRT.     

Electrocardiographic Clues to Identify Nonresponders to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: The aim of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is to restore myocardial electromechanical synchrony. Achieving this in patients with chronic severe heart failure due to poor left ventricular (LV) systolic function and cardiac dyssynchrony on optimal medical therapy, is associated with improved clinical performance and outcomes. Up to one‐third of patients undergoing CRT do not benefit from implantation. Ensuring LV capture is essential and can be at times difficult to confirm. Methods: Described herein, are six patients who underwent biventricular pacemaker implantation but failed to experience an improvement in LV systolic function or functional capacity. Results: In each case, the 12‐lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was helpful in unmasking loss of LV capture in patients who were presumed to have biventricular pacing. Conclusions: Despite the technical wizardry behind CRT and patient system analyzers, the surface ECG should continue to be an invaluable tool for evaluating patients who have undergone CRT. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 2010;15(4):369‐377     

Electrical and mechanical cardiac resynchronisation by novel direct his-bundle pacing in a heart failure patient

Efficacy of standard cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) by biventricular pacing via coronary sinus depends on the target site for left ventricular (LV) pacing, which in a not insignificant number of patients is limited by anatomical constraints. Direct His-bundle pacing (DHBP) is considered an alternative method of pacing for patients requiring cardiac stimulation in order to obviate detrimental effects of right ventricular pacing on LV function. However, its role in CRT has not been investigated, with scarce number of cases recently reported. We present a case of a heart failure patient in whom CRT was considered and treated by DHBP. In addition to electrical resynchronisation and optimal clinical response, echocardiography showed successful ventricular mechanical synchrony. To our knowledge, these latter findings are for the first time described in the setting of CRT by DHBP.     

Cardiac resynchronization pacing therapy

Approximately one third of patients with congestive heart failure and systolic dysfunction have an intraventricular conduction delay that is manifested as a QRS duration >120 ms. An intraventricular conduction delay adversely affects ventricular performance by causing dyssynchrony in ventricular activation. When ventricular dyssynchrony is present, simultaneous left and right ventricular pacing or cardiac resynchronization therapy can improve ventricular synchrony. This can lead to an improvement in hemodynamics, ventricular remodeling, mitral regurgitation, exercise capacity and quality of life. Candidates for cardiac resynchronization therapy include patients with advanced congestive heart failure that is refractory to medical therapy, a QRS duration >130 ms, left ventricular ejection fraction <0.35 and sinus rhythm. Because patients who are candidates for biventricular pacing are at high risk of sudden death, they should be considered for implantation of a biventricular pacing device that also provides defibrillation therapy. This paper reviews biventricular pacing for congestive heart failure, including results of acute hemodynamic studies and randomized clinical trials, patient and device selection, and procedural issues.     

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.     

Diminished left ventricular dyssynchrony and impact of resynchronization in failing hearts with right versus left bundle branch block.

OBJECTIVES: We compared mechanical dyssynchrony and the impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in failing hearts with a pure right (RBBB) versus left bundle branch block (LBBB). BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy is effective for treating failing hearts with conduction delay and discoordinate contraction. Most data pertain to LBBB delays. With RBBB, the lateral wall contracts early so that biventricular (BiV) pre-excitation may not be needed. Furthermore, the magnitude of dyssynchrony and impact of CRT in pure RBBB versus LBBB remains largely unknown. METHODS: Dogs with tachypacing-induced heart failure combined with right or left bundle branch radiofrequency ablation were studied. Basal dyssynchrony and effects of single and BiV CRT on left ventricular (LV) function were assessed by pressure-volume catheter and tagged magnetic resonance imaging, respectively. RESULTS: Left bundle branch block and RBBB induced similar QRS widening, and LV function (ejection fraction, maximum time derivative of LV pressure [dP/dt(max)]) was similarly depressed in failing hearts with both conduction delays. Despite this, mechanical dyssynchrony was less in RBBB (circumferential uniformity ratio estimate [CURE] index: 0.80 +/- 0.03 vs. 0.58 +/- 0.09 for LBBB, p < 0.04; CURE 0-->1 is dyssynchronous-->synchronous). Cardiac resynchronization therapy had correspondingly less effect on hearts with RBBB than those with LBBB (i.e., 5.5 +/- 1.1% vs. 29.5 +/- 5.0% increase in dP/dt(max), p < 0.005), despite similar baselines. Furthermore, right ventricular-only pacing enhanced function and synchrony in RBBB as well or better than did BiV, whereas LV-only pacing worsened function. CONCLUSIONS: Less mechanical dyssynchrony is induced by RBBB than LBBB in failing hearts, and the corresponding impact of CRT on the former is reduced. Right ventricular-only pacing may be equally efficacious as BiV CRT in hearts with pure right bundle branch conduction delay.     

Impact of acute biventricular pacing on left ventricular performance and volumes in patients with severe heart failure. A tissue doppler and three-dimensional echocardiographic study

OBJECTIVES: We used tissue velocity imaging (TVI) and three-dimensional echocardiography to evaluate the effect of acute biventricular pacing on left ventricular (LV) performance and volumes in patients with severe heart failure and bundle branch block. BACKGROUND: Biventricular pacing causes acute hemodynamic improvement in patients with severe heart failure, and QRS duration has been used as a predictor of improved resynchronization. Tissue velocity has the potential of demonstrating the degree of LV resynchronization and three-dimensional echocardiography enables accurate quantitation of LV volumes and function. METHODS: TVI and three-dimensional echocardiography were performed during sinus rhythm and biventricular pacing in 25 consecutive patients with severe heart failure. RESULTS: Biventricular pacing significantly improved the extent of contracting myocardium in synchrony by 15.4% and the duration of contraction synchrony by 17% (p < 0.05 for both). Furthermore, end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes decreased by 7 +/- 4.5% and 13 +/- 6% (p < 0.01) and ejection fraction increased by 22.8 +/- 9% (p < 0.01). Baseline duration of QRS and the preejection period as well as the extent of myocardium with asynchronous contraction measured by TVI predicted pacing efficacy. In multivariate analysis, only the extent of myocardium with asynchronous contraction at the LV base predicted biventricular pacing efficacy. CONCLUSION: Biventricular pacing improves LV systolic performance and reduces LV volumes during short-term treatment. TVI provides important pathophysiological information on the degree of LV resynchronization and may contribute to improved patient selection.     

Single-site ventricular and biventricular pacing: investigation of latest depolarization strategy.

Aims Cardiac resynchronization therapy with biventricular pacing has proved beneficial in symptomatic heart failure patients, yet the effects in patients with structurally normal hearts remain unknown. We hypothesized that, in an acute swine model with normal anatomy and function, single-site right ventricular (RV) pacing would better preserve haemodynamic function and electrical activation compared to biventricular pacing. Methods Endocardial single-site pacing was performed in anesthetized swine (n = 7) from the RV septum and RV apex. Biventricular pacing was performed using an epicardial left ventricular (LV) lead and a RV lead. High-resolution, non-contact mapping was employed to record LV activation sequences simultaneously with haemodynamic data after 5 min of consistent capture. Results All pacing interventions significantly prolonged QRS and total endocardial activation durations (P < 0.05) compared to intrinsic activation. Biventricular pacing with the RV apex lead significantly impaired LV systolic mechanics (dP/dt(max), max LV pressure; P < 0.05), and reduced LV relaxation to the greatest extent (dP/dt(min), P = ns). Right ventricular septal pacing conserved function better than other pacing interventions (P = ns) and elicited an intrinsic electrical activation sequence. Conclusion In intact, synchronous hearts, acute biventricular pacing resulted in systolic dysfunction and abnormal LV electrical activation.     

Effects of resynchronization therapy on cardiac function in pacemaker patients "upgraded" to biventricular devices

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves echocardiographic measures of cardiac function and has a variable effect on QRS duration in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). How CRT affects these indices in patients with right ventricular (RV) pacing-induced LBBB who are "upgraded" with left ventricular (LV) leads for CRT is unknown. We studied the echocardiographic effects of RV pacing and CRT in patients with prior continuous RV pacing after LV lead placement. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifteen consecutive patients (age 73 +/- 11 years, LV ejection fraction 24 +/- 6%, QRS duration 190 +/- 27 msec) with New York Heart Association class IIIB-IV symptoms and continuous RV pacing underwent LV lead placement for CRT. Echocardiography and ECG were performed sequentially during RV pacing and CRT. CRT was associated with significantly reduced QRS duration (190 +/- 27 msec vs 165 +/- 18 msec, P = 0.005) and reduced LV electromechanical delay (180 +/- 33 msec vs 161+/- 43 msec). Baseline QRS duration correlated with CRT response. After CRT, patients had significant improvements in indices of systolic function, including LV ejection fraction, myocardial performance index (MPI), and LV ejection time. Abnormal baseline MPI was associated with greater improvement after CRT. LV end-diastolic and systolic volumes were similarly decreased with CRT. Mitral valve deceleration time, an index of diastolic function, was not affected by CRT. CONCLUSION: "Upgrading" RV paced patients with advanced heart failure to CRT improves measures of electrical and LV mechanical synchrony and improves systolic function.     

Cardiac resynchronization therapy

Left ventricular (LV) dysynchrony, generally defined as the effect of intraventricular conduction defects or bundle branch block to produce nonsynchronous ventricular activation, places the failing heart at a further mechanical disadvantage. The deleterious effects of ventricular dysynchrony include suboptimal ventricular filling, paradoxical septal wall motion, reduced LV contractility, increased mitral regurgitation, and poor clinical outcomes (eg, increased hospitalization and mortality). The clinical and mechanical manifestations of ventricular dysynchrony can be treated by simultaneously pacing both the right and left ventricles usually in association with right atrial sensing, resulting in atrial-synchronized biventricular pacing or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The weight of evidence supporting the routine use of CRT in patients with heart failure with ventricular dysynchrony is now quite substantial. More than 4000 patients have been evaluated in randomized controlled trials of CRT, and several thousand additional patients have been assessed in observational studies and in registries. Data from these studies have consistently demonstrated the safety and efficacy of CRT in patients with New York Heart Association class III and IV heart failure. Cardiac resynchronization therapy has been shown to significantly improve LV structure and function, New York Heart Association functional class, exercise tolerance, quality of life, and morbidity and mortality.     

Hemodynamic effects of atrial septal pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients

INTRODUCTION: Spontaneous or pacing-induced interatrial conduction delay may affect the outcome of heart failure patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the atrial pacing site (right atrial appendage, RAA; and low interatrial septum, LIS) during biventricular (BV) pacing on the left ventricular (LV) systolic function in candidates for CRT. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifteen heart failure patients with left bundle branch block and LV ejection fraction < or =35% were enrolled. Electrodes were placed at the RAA, LIS, right ventricular apex, and LV free wall. A DDD protocol was tested, which consisted of 50 beats in AAI mode from the RAA followed by 50 beats in BV DDD mode with atrial pacing at the RAA (DDD_RAA) or at the LIS (DDD_LIS) at four AV delays. The average (+/-SD)%LV+dP/dtmax increase during DDD_RAA and DDD_LIS pacing with respect to baseline was 24 +/- 16% and 21 +/- 15%, respectively (P < 0.01), and average percentage change in aortic pulse pressure during DDD_RAA and DDD_LIS with respect to baseline (%PP) was 13 +/- 8% and 13 +/- 7% (ns). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a significant hemodynamic improvement with both DDD_RAA and DDD_LIS biventricular pacing compared to AAI pacing. However DDD_LIS pacing was not superior to DDD_RAA pacing in acute hemodynamic responses.