Cardiac resynchronization therapy with multipoint pacing in a patient with cancer therapeutics-related cardiac dysfunction.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Massacesi C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6552964 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:This registry was created to describe the experience of 76 Italian centres with a large cohort of recipients of multipoint pacing (MPP) capable cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices.A total of 507 patients in whom these devices had been successfully implanted were enrolled between August 2013 and May 2015. We analysed: (i) current clinical practices for the management of such patients, and (ii) the impact of MPP on heart failure clinical composite response and on the absolute change in ejection fraction (EF) at 6 months. Multipoint pacing was programmed to 'ON' in 46% of patients before discharge. Methods of optimizing MPP programming were most commonly based on either the greatest narrowing of the QRS complex (38%) or the electrical delays between the electrodes (34%). Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up data were evaluated in 232 patients. These patients were divided into two groups according to whether MPP was programmed to 'ON' (n = 94) or 'OFF' (n = 138) at the time of discharge. At 6 months, EF was significantly higher in the MPP group than in the biventricular-pacing group (39.1 ± 9.6 vs. 34.7 ± 7.6%; P < 0.001). Even after adjustments, early MPP activation remained an independent predictor of absolute increase in LVEF of ?5% (odds ratio 2.5; P = 0.001). At 6 months, an improvement in clinical composite score was recorded in a greater proportion of patients with MPP-ON than in controls (56 vs. 38%; P = 0.009). On comparing optimal MPP and conventional vectors, QRS was also seen to have decreased significantly (P < 0.001).This study provides information that is essential in order to deal with the expected increase in the number of patients receiving MPP devices in the coming years. The results revealed different practices among centres, and establishing the optimal programming that can maximize the benefit of MPP remains a challenging issue. Compared with conventional CRT, MPP improved clinical status and resulted in an additional increase in EF.http://www.clinicaltrial.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02606071.
| S-EPMC5834139 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is one of the cornerstones of heart failure (HF) therapy, as it has reduced mortality and morbidity and has shown improvement in functional capacity. Multipoint pacing (MPP) is a way of configuring CRT with the aim to improve the percentage of patients who respond to CRT.ObjectiveTo demonstrate the effectiveness of the MPP compared to traditional biventricular pacing (BiV).MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines of studies in which MPP vs BiV strategy were compared.ResultsMPP use is associated with a higher rate of patients experiencing functional improvement (odds ratio: 2.51, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.56-4.06; P = .0002) and with higher delta LV dP/dtmax (mean difference, 1.82; 95% CI, 0.24-3.39; P = .0240) with respect to BiV. MPP and BiV have no significantly different effect on left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) (mean difference, 0.39; 95% CI, -11.12 to 11.89; P = .9475); moreover, there is no significant difference between the 2 treatments regarding hospitalization for HF (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.54; P = .3816) and all-cause death (odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.62; P = .5460). MPP is associated with a significantly lower projected battery longevity (mean difference -8.66 months; 95% CI, -13.67 to -3.66; P = .00007) with respect to BiV.ConclusionMPP significantly improves functional class and acute hemodynamic parameters with respect to BiV. Prognostic indices and LVESV are not significantly influenced by MPP. MPP is associated with a significant reduction in projected battery longevity.
| S-EPMC8710588 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC8335856 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhether 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionCRT 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.
| S-EPMC7067690 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhether 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionCRT 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.
| S-EPMC7067690 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhether 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionCRT 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.
| S-EPMC7067690 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Phrenic nerve (PN) stimulation (PNS) frequently limits cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Yet, pacing strategies to minimize PNS have not been systematically compared. We propose to: (1) compare different pacing strategies to minimize PNS in CRT and (2) evaluate differences between PN and left ventricular (LV) capture thresholds among LV pacing configurations.PN and LV thresholds were obtained using 6 LV configurations in 28 patients with any PNS during CRT implantation or replacement. Incidence of PNS was compared in all LV configurations by programming pacing output to (1) One Volt (V) above LV threshold, (2) triple pulse width (PW) at LV threshold, and (3) 1.5 times LV threshold for each patient. PN thresholds and PN strength-duration curves were statistically different between configurations (P < 0.05). Ring?RVcoil and Ring?Can had the largest difference between PN and LV thresholds. Pacing output programmed to 1.5 times LV threshold, 1 V above LV threshold, and triple PW at LV threshold had similar probability of PNS between LV configurations. However, 1 V above LV threshold and triple PW at LV threshold frequently resulted in poor (< 30%) LV capture safety margin (14-43% and 53-68%, respectively). Freedom from PNS (programmed output at twice LV threshold) was found in 88%, 84%, and 52% with 6, 3, or 2 available LV configurations, respectively.Multiple LV pacing configurations marginally increase the probability of avoiding PNS by electronic reprogramming. Pacing output programmed to 1.5 times LV threshold is an additional alternative to minimize PNS when electronic reprogramming options are limited.
| S-EPMC4583217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular epicardial (BV-CS) or endocardial left ventricular (LV) stimulation (BV-EN) improves LV hemodynamics. The effect of CRT on right ventricular function is less clear, particularly for BV-EN. Our objective was to compare the simultaneous acute hemodynamic response (AHR) of the right and left ventricles (RV and LV) with BV-CS and BV-EN in order to determine the optimal mode of CRT delivery.MethodsNine patients with previously implanted CRT devices successfully underwent a temporary pacing study. Pressure wires measured the simultaneous AHR in both ventricles during different pacing protocols. Conventional epicardial CRT was delivered in LV-only (LV-CS) and BV-CS configurations and compared with BV-EN pacing in multiple locations using a roving decapolar catheter.ResultsBest BV-EN (optimal AHR of all LV endocardial pacing sites) produced a significantly greater RV AHR compared with LV-CS and BV-CS pacing (P < 0.05). RV AHR had a significantly increased standard deviation compared to LV AHR (P < 0.05) with a weak correlation between RV and LV AHR (Spearman rs = -0.06). Compromised biventricular optimization, whereby RV AHR was increased at the expense of a smaller decrease in LV AHR, was achieved in 56% of cases, all with BV-EN pacing.ConclusionsBV-EN pacing produces significant increases in both LV and RV AHR, above that achievable with conventional epicardial pacing. RV AHR cannot be used as a surrogate for optimizing LV AHR; however, compromised biventricular optimization is possible. The beneficial effect of endocardial LV pacing on RV function may have important clinical benefits beyond conventional CRT.
| S-EPMC4913734 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough 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.MethodsConsecutive 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.ResultsDuring 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.ConclusionIn our first Asian-Pacific real-world data, automated dynamic CRT optimization showed comparable efficacy to conventional methods regarding clinical outcomes and electromechanical remodeling.
| S-EPMC6624415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are associated with high morbidity and mortality, which is particularly detrimental when patients develop rapid ventricular rates (RVR). Atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation with pacemaker implantation has been used as a method of achieving rate control in patients with incessant AF with RVR. Right ventricular only pacing is known to be harmful in the setting of HF. His bundle pacing (HBP) and biventricular (BiV) pacing both offer durable pacing solutions that offer more physiologic activation. This review describes the benefits and drawbacks of HBP and BiV pacing in HF patients after AVJ ablation.
| S-EPMC6442941 | biostudies-literature