Explore the vast range of titles available.

Continuous automatic optimisation of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), stimulating only the left ventricle to fuse with intrinsic right bundle conduction (synchronised left ventricular stimulation), might offer better outcomes than conventional CRT in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block, and normal atrioventricular conduction. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of adaptive CRT versus conventional CRT in patients with heart failure with intact atrioventricular conduction and left bundle branch block. This global, prospective, randomised controlled trial was done in 227 hospitals in 27 countries across Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with class 2–4 heart failure, an ejection fraction of 35% or less, left bundle branch block with QRS duration of 140 ms or more (male patients) or 130 ms or more (female patients), and a baseline PR interval 200 ms or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via block permutation to adaptive CRT (an algorithm providing synchronised left ventricular stimulation) or conventional biventricular CRT using a device programmer. All patients received device programming but were masked until procedures were completed. Site staff were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death or intervention for heart failure decompensation and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety events were collected and reported in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02205359, and is closed to accrual. Between Aug 5, 2014, and Jan 31, 2019, of 3797 patients enrolled, 3617 (95·3%) were randomly assigned (1810 to adaptive CRT and 1807 to conventional CRT). The futility boundary was crossed at the third interim analysis on June 23, 2022, when the decision was made to stop the trial early. 1568 (43·4%) of 3617 patients were female and 2049 (56·6%) were male. Median follow-up was 59·0 months (IQR 45–72). A primary outcome event occurred in 430 of 1810 patients (Kaplan-Meier occurrence rate 23·5% [95% CI 21·3–25·5] at 60 months) in the adaptive CRT group and in 470 of 1807 patients (25·7% [23·5–27·8] at 60 months) in the conventional CRT group (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·78–1·01; p=0·077). System-related adverse events were reported in 452 (25·0%) of 1810 patients in the adaptive CRT group and 440 (24·3%) of 1807 patients in the conventional CRT group. Compared with conventional CRT, adaptive CRT did not significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause death or intervention for heart failure decompensation in the included population of patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block, and intact AV conduction. Death and heart failure decompensation rates were low with both CRT therapies, suggesting a greater response to CRT occurred in this population than in patients in previous trials. Medtronic.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), cardiac resynchronisation therapy pacemakers (CRT-Ps) and combination therapy (CRT-D) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction based on a range of clinical characteristics.MethodsIndividual patient data from 13 randomised trials were used to inform a decision analytical model. A series of regression equations were used to predict baseline all-cause mortality, hospitalisation rates and health-related quality of life and device-related treatment effects. Clinical variables used in these equations were age, QRS duration, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, ischaemic aetiology and left bundle branch block (LBBB). A UK National Health Service perspective and a lifetime time horizon were used. Benefits were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results were reported for 24 subgroups based on LBBB status, QRS duration and NYHA class.ResultsAt a threshold of £30 000 per QALY gained, CRT-D was cost-effective in 10 of the 24 subgroups including all LBBB morphology patients with NYHA I/II/III. ICD is cost-effective for all non-NYHA IV patients with QRS duration <120 ms and for NYHA I/II non-LBBB morphology patients with QRS duration between 120 ms and 149 ms. CRT-P was also cost-effective in all NYHA III/IV patients with QRS duration >120 ms. Device therapy is cost-effective in most patient groups with LBBB at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained. Results were robust to altering key model parameters.ConclusionsAt a threshold of £30 000 per QALY gained, CRT-D is cost-effective in a far wider group than previously recommended in the UK. In some subgroups ICD and CRT-P remain the cost-effective choice.

Objectives To evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes, treated by cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-d), and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy vs. CRTd patients under conventional hypoglycemic drugs. Background Patients with diabetes treated by CRTd experienced an amelioration of functional New York Association Heart class, reduction of hospital admissions, and mortality, in a percentage about 60%. However, about 40% of CRTd patients with diabetes experience a worse prognosis. Materials and methods We investigated the 12-months prognosis of CRTd patients with diabetes, previously treated with hypoglycemic drugs therapy (n 271) vs. a matched cohort of CRTd patients with diabetes treated with GLP-1 RA in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy (n 288). Results At follow up CRTd patients with diabetes treated by GLP-1 RA therapy vs. CRTd patients with diabetes that did not receive GLP-1 RA therapy, experienced a significant reduction of NYHA class (p value < 0.05), associated to higher values of 6 min walking test (p value < 0.05), and higher rate of CRTd responders (p value < 0.05). GLP-1 RA patients vs. controls at follow up end experienced lower AF events (p value < 0.05), lower VT events (p value < 0.05), lower rate of hospitalization for heart failure worsening (p value < 0.05), and higher rate of CRTd responders (p value < 0.05). To date, GLP-1 RA therapy may predict a reduction of AF events (HR 0.603, CI [0.411–0.884]), VT events (HR 0.964, CI [0.963–0.992]), and hospitalization for heart failure worsening (HR 0.119, CI [0.028–0.508]), and a higher CRT responders rate (HR 3.707, CI [1.226–14.570]). Conclusions GLP-1 RA drugs in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy may significantly reduce systemic inflammation and circulating BNP levels in CRTd patients with diabetes, leading to a significant improvement of LVEF and of the 6 min walking test, and to a reduction of the arrhythmic burden. Consequently, GLP-1 RA drugs in addition to conventional hypoglycemic therapy may reduce hospital admissions for heart failure worsening, by increasing CRTd responders rate. Trial registration NCT03282136. Registered 9 December 2017 “retrospectively registered”

In a randomized trial, patients with heart failure and a QRS duration of less than 130 msec were assigned to cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) or no CRT. There were no significant differences in rates of death from any cause or hospitalization for heart failure. Despite recent advances, heart failure remains a common cause of death and morbidity. According to current guidelines, cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) is indicated for patients receiving stable medical therapy recommended by current guidelines who have moderate-to-severe heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less, and a QRS duration of 120 msec or more as assessed electrocardiographically. 1 However, many patients with heart failure have a QRS duration of less than 120 msec, 2 and it is currently not recommended that they receive CRT. Up to 50% of these patients show echocardiographic evidence of ventricular dyssynchrony 3 , 4 and hence might benefit . . .

In this trial, patients with atrioventricular block and systolic dysfunction were randomly assigned to receive biventricular or right ventricular pacing. Clinical outcomes were superior with biventricular pacing. These data may extend the use of this pacing mode. Trials of cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) have included patients with advanced systolic heart failure and prolonged QRS duration. 1 These trials have specifically excluded patients with a moderate-to-high degree of atrioventricular block who require ventricular pacing in order to evaluate the effects of CRT independently of the potentially confounding detrimental effects of right ventricular pacing. Whereas right ventricular pacing achieves the primary goal of restoring an adequate heart rate in patients with atrioventricular block, studies suggest that right ventricular apical pacing may lead to progressive left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure in patients with preexisting left ventricular dysfunction, 2 , 3 presumably owing to . . .

Background Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a multi factorial disease, affecting clinical outcomes in failing heart patients treated by cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-d). Methods One hundred and ninety-five T2DM patients received a CRT-d treatment. Randomly the study population received a CRT-d via multipolar left ventricle (LV) lead pacing (n 99, multipolar group), vs a CRT-d via bipolar LV pacing (n 96, bipolar group). These patients were followed by clinical, and instrumental assessment, and telemetric device control at follow up. In this study we evaluated, in a population of failing heart T2DM patients, cardiac deaths, all cause deaths, arrhythmic events, CRT-d responders rate, hospitalizations for HF worsening, phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS), and LV catheter dislodgment events (and re-intervention for LV catheter re-positioning), comparing multipolar CRT-d vs bipolar CRT-d group of patients at follow up. Results At follow up there was a statistical significant difference about atrial arrhythmic events [7 (7%) vs 16 (16.7%), p value 0.019], hospitalizations for HF worsening [15 (15.2% vs 24 (25%), p value 0.046], LV catheter dislodgments [1 (1%) vs 9 (9.4%), p value 0018], PNS [5 (5%) vs 18 (18.7%), p value 0.007], and LV re-positioning [1 (1%) vs 9 (9.4%), p value 0.018], comparing multipolar CRT-d vs bipolar CRT-d group of patients. Multipolar pacing was an independent predictor of all these events. Conclusions CRT-d pacing via multipolar LV lead vs bipolar LV lead may reduce arrhythmic burden, hospitalization rate, PNS, LV catheters dislodgments, and re-interventions in T2DM failing heart patients. Clinical trial number NCT03095196

The WiSE system is a novel, leadless endocardial system that can provide cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients who cannot be treated with a conventional epicardial left ventricular lead. Safety and efficacy were being evaluated in the pivotal, randomized, double-blind SOLVE-CRT Trial (Stimulation of the Left Ventricular Endocardium for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.) The trial was initiated in 2018; however, patient enrollment was significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic necessitating a change in design. This article describes the revised trial and the scientific rationale for the specific changes in the protocol.

ObjectivesAssess safety and performance of novel quadripolar preshaped left ventricular (LV) leads: NAVIGO 4LV 2D (‘S shaped’) and NAVIGO 4LV ARC (‘U shaped’).MethodsPatients indicated for cardiac resynchronisation therapy were enrolled in a multicentre, prospective, controlled study (NAVIGATOR, NCT03279484). Patients were implanted with either a NAVIGO 4LV 2D or ARC lead, and assessed at 10 weeks, 6, 12 and 24 months post-implant. Co-primary safety and performance endpoints were assessed at 10 weeks. Safety endpoint was the patients’ rate free from lead-related complications. Performance endpoint was the rate of patients with successful lead performance, defined as LV pacing threshold ≤2.5 V at 0.5 ms on at least one pacing vector, and the absence of phrenic nerve stimulation at the final programmed configuration. Lead-related complications and electrical parameters were monitored throughout study.ResultsA NAVIGO 4LV lead was successfully implanted in 211 out of 217 patients (97.2%). The safety endpoint was met, with 100% and 96.1% of patients free from complications for NAVIGO 4LV 2D and ARC, respectively. The performance endpoint was met with 98.1% and 98.9% of patients with a successful lead performance for NAVIGO 4LV 2D and ARC, respectively. Over 12 months, the global complication-free rate for both leads was 97.1% (95% CI: 93.71% to 98.70%), with a mean pacing capture threshold of 1.23 V±0.73 V and a mean impedance of 951 Ω±300.1 Ω.ConclusionA high implantation success rate and low complication rate was reported for the novel NAVIGO 4LV 2D and ARC leads, along with successful performance up to 12 months.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes, functional capacity and quality of life in patients with heart failure. Despite two decades of experience with CRT, the rate of non-response remains approximately 30%. CRT efficacy is impacted by pacing location, which is anatomically limited in conventional systems. A new wireless endocardial left ventricular (LV) pacing system allows CRT without such limitations and has shown promise in open-label studies. The purpose of this study is to evaluate its use in a patient population with poor therapeutic alternatives. The SOLVE CRT study is an international, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial of patients with Class I and IIa indications for CRT who have either failed to respond to or have been unable to receive conventional CRT. Enrollment will comprise 350 patients implanted with the wireless CRT system randomized 1:1 to therapy on (Treatment) or therapy off (Control) for the six-month period over which trial primary endpoints will be evaluated. The primary safety endpoint will measure the proportion of patients free from system- and procedure-related complications. Primary efficacy endpoints will assess absolute change in LV end-systolic volume LVESV, proportion of patients reducing LVESV by ≥15% and clinical composite score for Treatment versus Control patients. Primary endpoints will be evaluated on an intention-to-treat basis, though per-protocol and as-treated analysis will also be performed. SOLVE-CRT will quantify the safety and effectiveness of wireless CRT in non-responders to conventional CRT and indicated patients who have been unable to receive CRT via the usual transvenous approach.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves symptoms, health-related quality of life and long-term survival in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) and shortens QRS duration. However, up to one third of patients attain no measurable clinical benefit from CRT. An important determinant of clinical response is optimal choice in left ventricular (LV) pacing site. Observational data have shown that achieving an LV lead position at a site of late electrical activation is associated with better clinical and echocardiographic outcomes compared to standard placement, but mapping-guided LV lead placement towards the site of latest electrical activation has never been investigated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of targeted positioning of the LV lead towards the latest electrically activated area. We hypothesize that this strategy is superior to standard LV lead placement. The DANISH-CRT trial is a national, double-blinded RCT (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03280862). A total of 1,000 patients referred for a de novo CRT implantation or an upgrade to CRT from right ventricular pacing will be randomized 1:1 to receive conventional LV lead positioning preferably in a nonapical posterolateral branch of the coronary sinus (CS) (control group) or targeted positioning of the LV lead to the CS branch with the latest local electrical LV activation (intervention group). In the intervention group, late activation will be determined using electrical mapping of the CS. The primary endpoint is a composite of death and nonplanned HF hospitalization. Patients are followed for a minimum of 2 years and until 264 primary endpoints occurred. Analyses will be conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle. Enrollment for this trial began in March 2018, and per April 2023, a total of 823 patients have been included. Enrollment is expected to be complete by mid-2024. The DANISH-CRT trial will clarify whether mapping-guided positioning of the LV lead according to the latest local electrical activation in the CS is beneficial for patients in terms of reducing the composite endpoint of death or nonplanned hospitalization for heart failure. Results from this trial are expected to impact future guidelines on CRT. NCT03280862.