Implantable defibrillator therapy and mortality in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy : An updated meta-analysis and effect on Dutch clinical practice by the Task Force of the Dutch Society of Cardiology.

BACKGROUND: Primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICMP) remains controversial. This study sought to assess the benefit of ICD therapy with or without cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) in patients with NICMP. In addition, data were compared with real-world clinical data to perform a risk/benefit analysis. METHODS: Relevant randomised clinical trials (RCTs) published in meta-analyses since DANISH, and in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from 2016 to 2020 were identified. The benefit of ICD therapy stratified by CRT use was assessed using random effects meta-analysis techniques. RESULTS: Six RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Among patients without CRT, ICD use was associated with a 24% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.93; P = 0.008). In contrast, among patients with CRT, a CRT-defibrillator was not associated with reduced mortality (HR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.47-1.16; P = 0.19). For ICD therapy without CRT, absolute risk reduction at 3­years follow-up was 3.7% yielding a number needed to treat of 27. CONCLUSION: ICD use significantly improved survival among patients with NICMP who are not eligible for CRT. Considering CRT, the addition of defibrillator therapy was not significantly associated with mortality benefit compared with CRT pacemaker.

Downgrade of cardiac defibrillator devices to pacemakers in elderly heart failure patients: clinical considerations and the importance of shared decision-making.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators are implanted on a large scale in patients with heart failure (HF) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death. There are different scenarios in which defibrillator therapy is no longer desired or indicated, and this is occurring increasingly in elderly patients. Usually device therapy is continued until the device has reached battery depletion. At that time, the decision needs to be made to either replace it or to downgrade to a pacing-only device. This decision is dependent on many factors, including the vitality of the patient and his/her preferences, but may also be influenced by changes in recommendations in guidelines. In the last few years, there has been an increased awareness that discussions around these decisions are important and useful. Advanced care planning and shared decision-making have become important and are increasingly recognised as such. In this short review we describe six elderly patients with HF, in whose cases we discussed these issues, and we aim to provide some scientific and ethical rationale for clinical decision-making in this context. Current guidelines advocate the discussion of end-of-life options at the time of device implantation, and physicians should realise that their choices influence patients' options in this critical phase of their illness.

Large variability in clinical judgement and definitions of left bundle branch block to identify candidates for cardiac resynchronisation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology is associated with improved outcome of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) and is an important criterion for patient selection. There are, however, multiple definitions for LBBB. Moreover, applying these definitions seems subjective. We investigated the inter- and intraobserver agreement in the determination of LBBB using available definitions, and clinicians' judgement of LBBB. METHODS: Observers were provided with 12­lead ECGs of 100 randomly selected CRT patients. Four observers judged the ECGs based on different LBBB-definitions (ESC, AHA/ACC/HRS, MADIT, and Strauss). Additionally, four implanting cardiologists scored the same 100 ECGs based on their clinical judgement. Observer agreement was summarized through the proportion of agreement (P) and kappa coefficient (k). RESULTS: Relative intra-observer agreement using different LBBB definitions, and within clinical judgement was moderate (range k 0.47-0.74 and k = 0.76 (0.14), respectively). The inter-observer agreement between observers using LBBB definitions as well as between clinical observers was minimal to weak (range k 0.19-0.44 and k = 0.35 (0.20), respectively). The probability of classifying an ECG as LBBB by available definitions varied considerably (range 0.20-0.76). The agreement between different definitions of LBBB ranged from good (P = 0.95 (0.07)) to weak (P = 0.40 (0.22)). Furthermore, correlation between the different LBBB definitions and clinical judgement was poor (range phi 0.30-0.55). CONCLUSION: Significant variation in the probability of classifying LBBB is present in using different definitions and clinical judgement. Considerable intra- and inter-observer variability adds to this variation. Interdefinition agreement varies significantly and correlation of clinical judgement with LBBB classification by definitions is modest at best.

Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.

In recent years the prevalence of implantation of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) has increased due to expanding implantation indications and prolonged life expectancy. Diagnostic strategies increasingly employ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to aid therapeutic strategies. In earlier guidelines, MRI was contra-indicated in patients with CIEDs, mainly due to previous reports of severe complications. With the development of MRI-conditional CIEDs and recent evidence concerning non-MRI-conditional CIEDs, MRIs in CIED patients can be safely performed in many hospitals.However, there are several questions that need to be addressed. Which patients can we scan? How can the scans be performed safely? And last but not least, can cardiac MRI provide diagnostic yield in patients with CIEDs?Current European guidelines are rather outdated and vague about patient selection and practical issues. There are national guidelines on this topic but several issues need extra attention and those are addressed in this point of view. It is important to create an environment with proper patient selection without unnecessary MRI scans in CIED patients, but also without unnecessary fear of complications, preventing access to MRI in patients who can benefit from this powerful diagnostic tool.

[Cardiac resynchronization therapy: who is a candidate and who is not?] / Cardiale-resynchronisatietherapie.

- Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) is a treatment for patients with impaired cardiac pump function (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35%) and a wide QRS complex who, despite maximum tolerated medical therapy, remain symptomatic.- In addition to reducing symptoms, CRT can reduce hospital admissions and improve survival.- Selection of patients for CRT remains difficult. Despite the fact that predicting and influencing success of CRT has improved, ~30% of patients do not respond to the therapy.- Optimizing therapy and follow-up of patients after implantation requires a multidisciplinary approach tailored to the individual patient.- Cardiac rehabilitation with life style advices and structured exercise training maximizes patient benefit from CRT.

Contemporary use of devices in heart failure.

Devices have become a cornerstone of heart failure (HF) therapy. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) decrease mortality, and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves symptoms and mortality. Most data have been collected in patients with systolic dysfunction. Data in patients with preserved systolic function are scarce, but interesting therapeutic concepts are evolving. Besides therapeutic functions, devices can have add-on diagnostic features such as early detection of fluid overload. In addition, stand-alone diagnostic devices are now also being developed for HF.

Cardiac gene expression profiling - the quest for an atrium-specific biomarker.

Biomarkers are gaining increasing interest to predict risk but also to aid in diagnostics. Tissue-specific biomarkers are of utmost importance to detect diseases of respective organs. As of yet there are no atrium-specific biomarkers for risk stratification of atrial disease, such as atrial fibrillation. Bioinformatics such as mRNA microarrays can help to detect tissue-enriched and possibly tissue-specific expressed genes that can be targets for biomarkers. We describe an approach to identify genes preferably expressed in atrial cardiomyocytes compared with ventricular cardiomyocytes by RNA microarray and confirmed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. By this approach we identified several atrium-enriched genes but also ventricle-enriched genes. As expected atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) mRNA showed higher expression in atrial cardiomyocytes while with adrenergic stimulation expression was almost as high in ventricular as in atrial cells. Brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), however, was not different between atrial and ventricular cells giving a possible explanation for increased levels of NT-proBNP in atrial fibrillation patients. Interesting identified candidates are serpine1 and ltbp2 as atrium-enriched genes whereas alpha-adrenergic receptor subtype 1b and S100A1 expression was significantly higher in ventricular cells. The identified genes need to be confirmed in human tissue and might ultimately be tested as potential biomarkers for atrial stress. (Neth Heart J 2010;18:610-4.).

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy and the role of optimal device utilisation.

Despite established selection criteria, 30 to 40% of patients do not respond to cardiac resynchronisation therapy. By optimising programming of the device response to cardiac resynchronisation, therapy can be improved. (Neth Heart J 2009;17:354-7.).