33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Optimisation of cardiac resynchronisation therapy during exercise

      editorial
      , , ,
      Netherlands Heart Journal
      Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The benefits of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) in selected cohorts with systolic dysfunction and congestive heart failure are well established [1–3]. CRT reduces heart failure hospitalisations, decreases mortality, and improves the quality of life and cardiac function, described as left ventricular (LV) reverse remodelling. CRT improves inter-, intra- and atrio-ventricular dyssynchrony. It is important to stress that there is only a moderate correlation between clinical and echocardiographic response; i.e. patients with improvement in their clinical status might not always show significant reverse remodelling. Nevertheless, the number of patients who do not respond to this therapy remain as high as 30 % to 40 %. The reasons for not responding to CRT are probably complex and multifactorial. Patient selection, accurate assessment of dyssynchrony, LV lead placement and optimal position and device programming are of importance. This necessitates a comprehensive evaluation of baseline and post-implant clinical, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic data. Moreover, LV lead position optimisation and device interrogation are useful for optimising CRT and should be considered to maximise the therapeutic response to CRT. It is recommended to perform AV-delay optimisation in all patients, guided either by the device or by echocardiography. However, the role of AV and VV optimisation regarding long-term outcome remain debatable. The SMART AV trial [4] showed that patients with normal AV delay did not derive benefit from echo-guided or device-guided AV optimisation compared with the empiric settings. However, patients with prolonged AV conduction were not included in this prospective, randomised trial. Moreover, in the Freedom trial [5] the authors concluded that routine AV and VV optimisation, by echo or the QuickOpt algorithm in unselected CRT recipients, did not appear to contribute significantly to further improving responsiveness to CRT. A variety of techniques, including echocardiography-guided methods, have been described to determine the optimal AV and VV delays. Many of these techniques have poor reproducibility and are time-consuming [6, 7]. None of these techniques have been shown to be superior and long-term benefits are lacking. Most device-based algorithms allow a rapid, simplified approach to CRT optimisation. However, their clinical value has also been called into question. Only the CLEAR study [8, 9] results suggest the clinical value of frequent CRT optimisation by SonRTM algorithm or echocardiography in severe chronic heart failure patients in the long-term. Recently a new non-invasive finger plethysmographic (Nexfin) method has been used for AV optimisation [10]. The Nexfin device, which allows measurement of beat-to-beat stroke volume (SV), was validated against echocardiography and the Riva-Rocci/Korotkoff method [11, 12] and AV optimisation by this device led to an almost 7 % increase in SV [10]. In this issue of the Journal, Molenaar et al.[13] present their data on optimisation of CRT in clinical practice during exercise using the Nexfin device. They found a heterogeneous optimal AV delay in their small-sized study population. Currently, optimisation of pacing settings is mainly performed during resting conditions [14]. A few questions can be asked. The first question is whether the optimal AV delay changes during exercise in heart failure patients? Bogaard et al. [14] reviewed the literature and found seven small-sized studies which addressed this issue. The reported results were not consistent: a shortening, lengthening or no change in optimal AV delay during exercise was observed. Based on the physiological properties of the AV node in healthy subjects, these heterogeneous responses to exercise were unexpected [14]. The optimal physiological response to exercise in heart failure patients is probably different compared with healthy subjects. Thus, the findings of Molenaar et al. on the true heterogeneous effect of AV optimisation in heart failure patients are in line with previous reports [14]. The second question is whether the programming of a rate-adaptive AV delay has a significant influence on outcome. In the same review by Bogaard et al. [14] it was concluded that in all the studies only acute haemodynamic outcomes were assessed. Molenaar et al. showed an increase of 10 % in stroke volume. This is again an acute haemodynamic measurement. An interesting and relevant question is whether this adaptive AV delay, which is a time-consuming method, has an influence on functional NYHA class and exercise capacity in heart failure patients. Therefore, the long-term follow-up results of their study will be very interesting. Finally, Molenaar et al. used a non-invasive method provided by the Nexfin device, which is relatively new and is not yet well validated for this purpose. Other methods such as echocardiography, including transmitral flow and LV outflow tract velocity (LVOT-VTI) measurements, have been used much more in clinical practice [6, 7]. Nevertheless, these methods are time-consuming and are moderately reproducible. Device-based algorithms such as QuickOpt and Smart AV did not show any benefit compared with nominal settings and were not tested during exercise. At the moment, programming a sensed AV delay of 100–120 ms still seems the best practice in the majority of patients until more data on clinical outcome become available [4, 10, 14]. Currently, two multicentre and randomised trials (Bio-Detect HF and Respond CRT) are investigating the benefits of optimising AV and VV delay on clinical outcome by device-based automated algorithm. In summary, the 10 % increase in stroke volume due to AV-delay optimisation by the Nexfin device during exercise, which Molenaar et al. have showed, is a very interesting and encouraging result. However, the current methods of optimising rate-adaptive AV delay, including the Nexfin method, need to be tested in a larger number of patients with a longer follow-up before definite conclusions can be made.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cardiac-resynchronization therapy for the prevention of heart-failure events.

          This trial was designed to determine whether cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing would reduce the risk of death or heart-failure events in patients with mild cardiac symptoms, a reduced ejection fraction, and a wide QRS complex. During a 4.5-year period, we enrolled and followed 1820 patients with ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an ejection fraction of 30% or less, a QRS duration of 130 msec or more, and New York Heart Association class I or II symptoms. Patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2 ratio to receive CRT plus an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (1089 patients) or an ICD alone (731 patients). The primary end point was death from any cause or a nonfatal heart-failure event (whichever came first). Heart-failure events were diagnosed by physicians who were aware of the treatment assignments, but they were adjudicated by a committee that was unaware of assignments. During an average follow-up of 2.4 years, the primary end point occurred in 187 of 1089 patients in the CRT-ICD group (17.2%) and 185 of 731 patients in the ICD-only group (25.3%) (hazard ratio in the CRT-ICD group, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.84; P=0.001). The benefit did not differ significantly between patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and those with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. The superiority of CRT was driven by a 41% reduction in the risk of heart-failure events, a finding that was evident primarily in a prespecified subgroup of patients with a QRS duration of 150 msec or more. CRT was associated with a significant reduction in left ventricular volumes and improvement in the ejection fraction. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the overall risk of death, with a 3% annual mortality rate in each treatment group. Serious adverse events were infrequent in the two groups. CRT combined with ICD decreased the risk of heart-failure events in relatively asymptomatic patients with a low ejection fraction and wide QRS complex. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00180271.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cardiac-resynchronization therapy for mild-to-moderate heart failure.

            Cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) benefits patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and a wide QRS complex. Most of these patients are candidates for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). We evaluated whether adding CRT to an ICD and optimal medical therapy might reduce mortality and morbidity among such patients. We randomly assigned patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and an intrinsic QRS duration of 120 msec or more or a paced QRS duration of 200 msec or more to receive either an ICD alone or an ICD plus CRT. The primary outcome was death from any cause or hospitalization for heart failure. We followed 1798 patients for a mean of 40 months. The primary outcome occurred in 297 of 894 patients (33.2%) in the ICD-CRT group and 364 of 904 patients (40.3%) in the ICD group (hazard ratio in the ICD-CRT group, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.87; P<0.001). In the ICD-CRT group, 186 patients died, as compared with 236 in the ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91; P = 0.003), and 174 patients were hospitalized for heart failure, as compared with 236 in the ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). However, at 30 days after device implantation, adverse events had occurred in 124 patients in the ICD-CRT group, as compared with 58 in the ICD group (P<0.001). Among patients with NYHA class II or III heart failure, a wide QRS complex, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction, the addition of CRT to an ICD reduced rates of death and hospitalization for heart failure. This improvement was accompanied by more adverse events. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Medtronic of Canada; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00251251.).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Primary results from the SmartDelay determined AV optimization: a comparison to other AV delay methods used in cardiac resynchronization therapy (SMART-AV) trial: a randomized trial comparing empirical, echocardiography-guided, and algorithmic atrioventricular delay programming in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

              one variable that may influence cardiac resynchronization therapy response is the programmed atrioventricular (AV) delay. The SmartDelay determined av optimization: a comparison to other AV delay methods used in cardiac resynchronization therapy (SMART-AV) trial prospectively randomized patients to a fixed empirical AV delay (120 milliseconds), echocardiographically optimized AV delay, or AV delay optimized with SmartDelay, an electrogram-based algorithm. a total of 1014 patients (68% men; mean age, 66 ± 11 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction, 25 ± 7%) who met enrollment criteria received a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator, and 980 patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio. All patients were programmed (DDD-60 or DDDR-60) and evaluated after implantation and 3 and 6 months later. The primary end point was left ventricular end-systolic volume. Secondary end points included New York Heart Association class, quality-of-life score, 6-minute walk distance, left ventricular end-diastolic volume, and left ventricular ejection fraction. The medians (quartiles 1 and 3) for change in left ventricular end-systolic volume at 6 months for the SmartDelay, echocardiography, and fixed arms were -21 mL (-45 and 6 mL), -19 mL (-45 and 6 mL), and -15 mL (-41 and 6 mL), respectively. No difference in improvement in left ventricular end-systolic volume at 6 months was observed between the SmartDelay and echocardiography arms (P=0.52) or the SmartDelay and fixed arms (P=0.66). Secondary end points, including structural (left ventricular end-diastolic volume and left ventricular ejection fraction) and functional (6-minute walk, quality of life, and New York Heart Association classification) measures, were not significantly different between arms. neither SmartDelay nor echocardiography was superior to a fixed AV delay of 120 milliseconds. The routine use of AV optimization techniques assessed in this trial is not warranted. However, these data do not exclude possible utility in selected patients who do not respond to cardiac resynchronization therapy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +31-38-4242374 , +31-38-4243222 , v.r.c.derks@isala.nl
                Journal
                Neth Heart J
                Neth Heart J
                Netherlands Heart Journal
                Bohn Stafleu van Loghum (Houten )
                1568-5888
                1876-6250
                7 August 2013
                7 August 2013
                October 2013
                : 21
                : 10
                : 456-457
                Affiliations
                Department of Cardiology, Isala Klinieken, Groot Wezenland 20, 8011 JW Zwolle, the Netherlands
                Article
                461
                10.1007/s12471-013-0461-4
                3776078
                23922020
                39edc1fc-fbc0-4287-bbf9-cb2426108979
                © The Author(s) 2013

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.

                History
                Categories
                Editorial Comment
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2013

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                Cardiovascular Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article