Dataset Information

Noninvasive electrocardiographic assessment of ventricular activation and remodeling response to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) produces acute changes in electric resynchronization that can be measured noninvasively with electrocardiographic body surface mapping (ECGi). The relation between baseline acute electrophysiology metrics and their manipulation with CRT and reverse remodeling is unclear.

Objective

To test (ECGi) derived parameters of electrical activation as predictors of volumetric response to CRT.

Methods

ECGi was performed in 21 patients directly following CRT implant. Activation parameters (left ventricular total activation time [LVtat], global biventricular total activation time [VVtat], global left/right ventricular electrical synchrony [VVsync], and global left ventricular dispersion of activation times [LVdisp]) were measured at baseline and following echocardiographically optimized CRT. Remodeling response (>15% reduction left ventricular end-systolic volume) was assessed 6 months post CRT.

Results

Patients were aged 68.9 ± 12.1 years, 81% were male, and 57% were ischemic. Baseline measures of dyssynchrony were more pronounced in left bundle branch block (LBBB) vs non-LBBB. ECGi demonstrated a trend of greater interventricular dyssynchrony between responders and nonresponders that did not reach statistical significance (VVsync: -45.7 ± 22.4 ms vs -25.1 ± 29.3 ms, P = .227). Remaining activation parameters were similar between responders and nonresponders (VVtat 101 ± 22.0 ms vs 98.9 ± 23.4 ms, P = .838; LVtat 86.4 ± 17.1 ms vs 85.1 ± 27.7 ms, P = .904; LVdisp 28.2 ± 6.3 ms vs 27.0 ± 8.7 ms, P = .726). In volumetric responders activation parameters were significantly improved with CRT compared to nonresponders: VV sync (-45.67 ± 22.41 ms vs 2.33±18.87 ms, P = .001), VVtat (101 ± 22.04 ms vs 71 ± 14.01 ms, P = .002), LVtat (86.44 ± 17.15 ms vs 67.67 ± 11.31 ms, P = .006), and LVdisp (28.22 ± 6.3 ms vs 21.56 ± 4.45 ms, P = .008).

Conclusion

Baseline ECGi activation times did not predict CRT volumetric response. Volumetric responders exhibited significant improvements in ECGi-derived metrics with CRT. ECGi does not select CRT candidates but may be a useful adjunct to guide left ventricle lead implants and to perform postimplant CRT optimization.

SUBMITTER: Jackson T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8183873 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response assessment relies on the QRS complex narrowing criterion. Yet one third of patients do not improve despite narrowed QRS after implantation. Electromechanical wave imaging (EWI) is a quantitative echocardiography-based technique capable of noninvasively mapping cardiac electromechanical activation in three dimensions. The aim of this exploratory study was to investigate the EWI technique, sensitive to ventricular dyssynchrony, for informing CRT response on the day of implantation.MethodsForty-four patients with heart failure with left bundle branch block or right ventricular (RV) paced rhythm and decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; mean, 25.3 ± 9.6%) underwent EWI without and with CRT within 24 hours of device implantation. Of those, 16 were also scanned while in left ventricular (LV) pacing. Improvement in LVEF at 3-, 6-, or 9-month follow-up defined (1) super-responders (ΔLVEF ≥ 20%), (2) responders (10% ≤ ΔLVEF < 20%), and (3) nonresponders (ΔLVEF ≤ 5%). Three-dimensionally rendered electromechanical maps were obtained under RV, LV, and biventricular CRT pacing conditions. Mean RV free wall and LV lateral wall activation times were computed. The percentage of resynchronized myocardium was measured by quantifying the percentage of the left ventricle activated within 120 msec of QRS onset. Correlations between percentage of resynchronized myocardium and type of CRT response were assessed.ResultsLV lateral wall activation time was significantly different (P ≤ .05) among all three pacing conditions in the 16 patients: LV lateral wall activation time with CRT in biventricular pacing (73.1 ± 17.6 msec) was lower compared with LV pacing (89.5 ± 21.5 msec) and RV pacing (120.3 ± 17.8 msec). Retrospective analysis showed that the percentage of resynchronized myocardium with CRT was a reliable response predictor within 24 hours of implantation for significantly (P ≤ .05) identifying super-responders (n = 7; 97.7 ± 1.9%) from nonresponders (n = 17; 89.9 ± 9.9%).ConclusionElectromechanical activation mapping constitutes a valuable three-dimensional visualization tool within 24 hours of implantation and could potentially aid in the timely assessment of CRT response rates, including during implantation for adjustment of lead placement and pacing outcomes.