Baldeep Sidhu

Guidance for Optimal Site Selection of a Leadless Left Ventricular Endocardial Electrode Improves Acute Hemodynamic Response and Chronic Remodeling

OBJECTIVESnThis study hypothesized that guided implants, in which the optimal left ventricular endocardial (LVENDO) pacing location was identified and targeted, would improve acute markers of contractility and chronic markers of cardiac resynchronization (CRT) response.nnnBACKGROUNDnBiventricular endocardial (BiVENDO) pacing may offer a potential benefit over standard CRT; however, the optimal LVENDO pacing site is highly variable. Indiscriminately delivered BiVENDO pacing is associated with a reverse remodeling response rate of between 40% and 60%.nnnMETHODSnRegistry of centers implanting a wireless, LVENDO pacing system (WiSE-CRT System, EBR Systems, Sunnyvale, California); John Radcliffe Hospital (Oxford, United Kingdom), Guys and St. Thomas Hospital (London, United Kingdom), and The James Cook University Hospital (Middlesbrough, United Kingdom). Centers used a combination of preprocedural imaging and electroanatomical mapping the identify the optimal LVENDO site.nnnRESULTSnA total of 26 patients across the 3 centers underwent a guided implant. Patients were predominantly male with a mean age of 68.8 ± 8.4 years, the mean LV ejection fraction was 34.2 ± 7.8%. The mean QRS duration was 163.8 ± 26.7 ms, and 30.8% of patients had an ischemic etiology. It proved technically feasible to selectively target and deploy the pacing electrode in a chosen endocardial segment in almost all cases, with a similar complication rate to that observed during indiscriminate BiVENDO. Ninety percent of patients met the definition of echocardiographic responder. Reverse remodeling was observed in 71%.nnnCONCLUSIONSnGuided endocardial implants were associated with a higher degree of chronic LV remodeling compared with historical nonguided approaches.

Chronic Right Ventricular Pacing in the Heart Failure Population

Purpose of ReviewWe review the trials that have demonstrated potentially harmful effects from right ventricular (RV) apical pacing as well as reviewing the evidence of alternative RV pacing sites and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for patients who have heart failure and atrioventricular (AV) block.Recent FindingsThe role of CRT in patients with AV block and impaired left ventricular function remains an important consideration. The BLOCK HF trial demonstrated better outcomes with CRT pacing over RV pacing in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and AV block who were expected to have a high RV pacing burden, but failed to demonstrate a mortality benefit.SummaryCRT seems to have a beneficial effect on left ventricular reverse remodeling, systolic function, and clinical outcomes in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I–III heart failure, moderate to severe LVSD, and AV block compared to RV pacing. However, it is less clear whether there is a similar benefit from CRT in patients with a high percentage of RV pacing who have normal or mild LVSD in the treatment of AV block.

The role of transvenous lead extraction in the management of redundant or malfunctioning pacemaker and defibrillator leads post ELECTRa

Cardiac implantable electronic devices implantation rates have increased over the past decade due to broader indications and an ageing population. Similarly, device and lead complications have also risen. The management of pacemaker/defibrillator leads that are no longer required (redundant) or malfunctioning, can be contentious. There is a need to balance the risk of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) against those of lead abandonment. The recently published European Lead Extraction ConTRolled Registry (ELECTRa) study provides contemporary outcomes for TLE across Europe with important implications for the management of redundant and/or malfunctioning leads. This review article discusses the potential complications for each interventional approach when managing redundant or malfunctioning pacemaker leads.

Variation in activation time during bipolar vs extended bipolar left ventricular pacing: SIENIEWICZ et al.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is typically delivered via quadripolar leads that allow stimulation using either true bipolar pacing, where stimulation occurs between two electrodes (BP) on the quadripolar lead, or extended bipole (EBP) left ventricular (LV) pacing, with the quadripolar electrodes and right ventricular coil acting as the cathode and anode, respectively. True bipolar pacing is associated with reductions in mortality and it has been postulated that these differences are the result of enhanced electrical activation.

Understanding non-response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy: common problems and potential solutions

Heart failure is a complex clinical syndrome associated with a significant morbidity and mortality burden. Reductions in left ventricular (LV) function trigger adaptive mechanisms, leading to structural changes within the LV and the potential development of dyssynchronous ventricular activation. This is the substrate targeted during cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT); however, around 30–50% of patients do not experience benefit from this treatment. Non-response occurs as a result of pre-implant, peri-implant and post implant factors but the technical constraints of traditional, transvenous epicardial CRT mean they can be challenging to overcome. In an effort to improve response, novel alternative methods of CRT delivery have been developed and of these endocardial pacing, where the LV is stimulated from inside the LV cavity, appears the most promising.

Beat-to-Beat Variability of Ventricular Action Potential Duration Oscillates at Low Frequency During Sympathetic Provocation in Humans

Background: The temporal pattern of ventricular repolarization is of critical importance in arrhythmogenesis. Enhanced beat-to-beat variability (BBV) of ventricular action potential duration (APD) is pro-arrhythmic and is increased during sympathetic provocation. Since sympathetic nerve activity characteristically exhibits burst patterning in the low frequency range, we hypothesized that physiologically enhanced sympathetic activity may not only increase BBV of left ventricular APD but also impose a low frequency oscillation which further increases repolarization instability in humans. Methods and Results: Heart failure patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator devices (n = 11) had activation recovery intervals (ARI, surrogate for APD) recorded from left ventricular epicardial electrodes alongside simultaneous non-invasive blood pressure and respiratory recordings. Fixed cycle length was achieved by right ventricular pacing. Recordings took place during resting conditions and following an autonomic stimulus (Valsalva). The variability of ARI and the normalized variability of ARI showed significant increases post Valsalva when compared to control (p = 0.019 and p = 0.032, respectively). The oscillatory behavior was quantified by spectral analysis. Significant increases in low frequency (LF) power (p = 0.002) and normalized LF power (p = 0.019) of ARI were seen following Valsalva. The Valsalva did not induce changes in conduction variability nor the LF oscillatory behavior of conduction. However, increases in the LF power of ARI were accompanied by increases in the LF power of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and the rate of systolic pressure increase (dP/dtmax). Positive correlations were found between LF-SBP and LF-dP/dtmax (rs = 0.933, p < 0.001), LF-ARI and LF-SBP (rs = 0.681, p = 0.001) and between LF-ARI and LF-dP/dtmax (rs = 0.623, p = 0.004). There was a strong positive correlation between the variability of ARI and LF power of ARI (rs = 0.679, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In heart failure patients, physiological sympathetic provocation induced low frequency oscillation (~0.1 Hz) of left ventricular APD with a strong positive correlation between the LF power of APD and the BBV of APD. These findings may be of importance in mechanisms underlying stability/instability of repolarization and arrhythmogenesis in humans.

Optimal site selection & image fusion guidance technology to facilitate cardiac resynchronisation therapy

ABSTRACT Introduction: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as one of the few effective treatments for heart failure. However, up to 50% of patients derive no benefit. Suboptimal left ventricle (LV) lead position is a potential cause of poor outcomes while targeted lead deployment has been associated with enhanced response rates. Image-fusion guidance systems represent a novel approach to CRT delivery, allowing physicians to both accurately track and target a specific location during LV lead deployment. Areas covered: This review will provide a comprehensive evaluation of how to define the optimal pacing site. We will evaluate the evidence for delivering targeted LV stimulation at sites displaying favorable viability or advantageous mechanical or electrical properties. Finally, we will evaluate several emerging image-fusion guidance systems which aim to facilitate optimal site selection during CRT. Expert commentary: Targeted LV lead deployment is associated with reductions in morbidity and mortality. Assessment of tissue characterization and electrical latency are critical and can be achieved in a number of ways. Ultimately, the constraints of coronary sinus anatomy have forced the exploration of novel means of delivering CRT including endocardial pacing which hold promise for the future of CRT delivery.

Complications associated with cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrades versus de novo implantations.

ABSTRACT Introduction: A significant number of patients undergo upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). These patients tend to differ from individuals undergoing de novo CRT implantations both in terms of their baseline demographics and the etiology underlying their heart failure. Areas covered: There are several factors that need to be considered when upgrading patients to CRT, such as, venous patency. Potentially, these conditions can cause issues which may result in procedures being more difficult than de novo implantations. This article discusses these issues and compares the rates of procedural-related complications for CRT upgrades and de novo implantations. It discusses the proportion of patients that are likely to respond to CRT with each intervention. Expert commentary: Understanding the relative risks of CRT upgrades versus de novo implantations is important to help operators select the correct initial device and counsel patients accordingly. Growing experience with image-guided implantations and endocardial pacing may prove to be particularly relevant to patients undergoing CRT upgrades.