Search

Introduction Automatic adjustment of atrioventricular delay (AVD) with SyncAV has been shown to improve electrical synchronization. However, the long term effects of SyncAV optimization on electrical synchrony are unknown. Purpose Evaluate the effect of SyncAV programming on 6-month (6mo) QRS duration during biventricular (BiV) and left ventricle only MultiPoint Pacing (MPP). Methods Patients with LBBB and QRS duration (QRSd) ≥ 150 ms scheduled for CRT-P/D device implantation with quadripolar LV lead were enrolled in this prospective study. QRSd was measured post-implant from 12-lead surface ECG by blinded experts during the following pacing modes: intrinsic conduction, MPP (MPP=RV+LV1+LV2) and LV-only MPP (LVMPP=LV1+LV2). For each mode, SyncAV was enabled (e.g. MPP+SyncAV) with the patient-tailored SyncAV offset that minimized QRSd. Patients were then randomized 1:1 to receive MPP+SyncAV or LVMPP+SyncAV with the optimal offset identified at implant, and QRSd was re-evaluated at the 6mo follow-up. Results Fifty-nine patients (72% male, 41% ischemic, 26% ejection fraction, 166 ms intrinsic QRSd) completed device implant and QRSd assessment. Relative to intrinsic conduction at implant, the MPP+SyncAV group (n=30) had a QRSd reduction of 26% at implant (162 to 122 ms, p<0.001), and 20% at 6mo (162 to 130 ms, p<0.001). The LVMPP+SyncAV group (n=29) had a QRSd reduction of 24% at implant (165 to 128 ms, p<0.001), and 15% at 6mo (165 to 140 ms, p<0.001). In the MPP+SyncAV group, 28/30 (93%) of patients had more than 10% reduction in QRSd with respect to intrinsic at implant, with 27/30 (90%) maintaining this trend at 6 mo follow up. With LVMPP+SyncAV pacing, only 25/29 (86%) of patients had more than 10% reduction in QRSd with respect to intrinsic at implant, and this reduced to 18/29 (62%) maintaining this trend at 6 mo follow up. Conclusion MPP combined with SyncAV significantly improved acute electrical synchrony at implant in CRT patients with LBBB, as ass

Contains fulltext : 238808.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is one of the most effective therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and leads to improved quality of life, reductions in heart failure hospitalization rates and all-cause mortality. Nevertheless, up to two-thirds of eligible patients are not referred for CRT. Furthermore, post-implantation follow-up is often fragmented and suboptimal, hampering the potential maximal treatment effect. This joint position statement from three European Society of Cardiology Associations, Heart Failure Association (HFA), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), focuses on optimized implementation of CRT. We offer theoretical and practical strategies to achieve more comprehensive CRT referral and post-procedural care by focusing on four actionable domains: (i) overcoming CRT under-utilization, (ii) better understanding of pre-implant characteristics, (iii) abandoning the term 'non-response' and replacing this by the concept of disease modification, and (iv) implementing a dedicated post-implant CRT care pathway.

Contains fulltext : 235382.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is one of the most effective therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and leads to improved quality of life, reductions in heart failure hospitalization rates and all-cause mortality. Nevertheless, up to two-thirds of eligible patients are not referred for CRT. Furthermore, post-implantation follow-up is often fragmented and suboptimal, hampering the potential maximal treatment effect. This joint position statement from three European Society of Cardiology Associations, Heart Failure Association (HFA), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), focuses on optimized implementation of CRT. We offer theoretical and practical strategies to achieve more comprehensive CRT referral and post-procedural care by focusing on four actionable domains: (i) overcoming CRT under-utilization, (ii) better understanding of pre-implant characteristics, (iii) abandoning the term 'non-response' and replacing this by the concept of disease modification, and (iv) implementing a dedicated post-implant CRT care pathway.