Voltage gradients in transvenous and subcutaneous defibrillation and their risk of myocardial damage.

INTRODUCTION: Transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks have been associated with cardiac biomarker elevations and are thought in some cases to contribute to adverse clinical outcomes and mortality, possibly from myocardium exposed to excessive shock voltage gradients. Currently, there are only limited data for comparison with subcutaneous ICDs. We sought to compare ventricular myocardium voltage gradients resulting from transvenous (TV) and subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD) shocks to assess their risk of myocardial damage. METHODS: A finite element model was derived from thoracic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Voltage gradients were modeled for an S-ICD with a left-sided parasternal coil and a left-sided TV-ICD with a mid-cavity, a septal right ventricle (RV) coil, or a dual coil lead (TV mid, TV septal, TV septal + superior vena cava [SVC]). High gradients were defined as > 100 V/cm. RESULTS: The volumes of ventricular myocardium with high gradients > 100 V/cm were 0.02, 2.4, 7.7, and 0 cc for TV mid, TV septal, TV septal + SVC, and S-ICD, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our models suggest that S-ICD shocks produce more uniform gradients in the myocardium, with less exposure to potentially damaging electrical fields, compared to TV-ICDs. Dual coil TV leads yield higher gradients, as does closer proximity of the shock coil to the myocardium.

Should Primary Prevention ICDs Still Be Placed in Patients with Non-ischemic Cardiomyopathy? A Review of the Evidence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent evidence has suggested that implantable defibrillator (ICD) in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) may not offer mortality benefit in the presence of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). RECENT FINDINGS: Despite significant benefits of GDMT and CRT, current evidence is derived from ICD trials that rely predominantly on reduced left ventricular ejection fraction alone (LVEF). The majority of patients with sudden cardiac death (SCD) have LVEF > 30% indicating that LVEF by itself is an inadequate predictor of SCD. The Danish study to assess the efficacy of ICD in patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure on mortality (DANISH) highlights the importance of better risk stratifying NICM patients for ICD implantation. Assessment of life expectancy, comorbidities, presence of advanced heart failure, etiology of NICM, and the presence of myocardial fibrosis can help risk stratify ICD beyond LVEF. Genetics and biomarkers can be of further assistance in risk stratification.

QRS morphology, left ventricular lead location, and clinical outcome in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy.

AIMS: Several studies have reported a poor outcome with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in non-left bundle branch block (LBBB) patients. Although the left ventricular (LV) lead location is an important determinant of the clinical outcome, there is scant information regarding its role in non-LBBB patients. This study sought to examine the impact of electrical and anatomical location of the LV lead in relation to baseline QRS morphology on the CRT outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: A left ventricular lead electrical delay (LVLED) was measured intra-procedurally as an interval between QRS onset on the surface electrocardiogram (ECG) to the peak of sensed electrogram on LV lead and corrected for QRS width. The impact of the LVLED on time to first heart failure hospitalization (HFH), and composite outcome of all-cause mortality, HFH, LVAD implantation, and cardiac transplantation at 3 years was assessed. Among 144 patients (age 67 ± 12 years, QRS duration 156 ± 28 ms, non-LBBB 43%), HFH was higher in non-LBBB compared with LBBB (43.5 vs. 24%, P = 0.015). Within LBBB, patients with the long LVLED (≥50%) had 17% HFH vs. 53% in the short LVLED (<50%), P = 0.002. Likewise in non-LBBB, patients with the long LVLED compared with the short LVLED had a lower HFH (36 vs. 61%, P = 0.026). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, the long LVLED in LBBB and non-LBBB was associated with an improved outcome. Specifically, in non-LBBB, LVLED ≥50% was associated with improved event-free survival with respect to time to first HFH (HR: 0.34; P = 0.011) and composite outcome (HR: 0.41; P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: Cardiac resynchronization therapy delivered from an LV pacing site characterized by the long LVLED was associated with the favourable outcome in LBBB and non-LBBB patients.

Virtual multidisciplinary care for heart failure patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) patients with CRT devices are a vulnerable patient population during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic. It is important to develop innovative virtual care models to deliver multidisciplinary care while minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV2 exposure. OBJECTIVE: We aim to provide a description of how HF patients with CRT devices were assessed and managed in our virtual multidisciplinary clinic during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Clinical outcomes between this group of patients seen in virtual clinic and a historical cohort followed by in-person multi-disciplinary clinic prior to the pandemic were compared. METHOD: This is a retrospective cohort study of HF patients with CRT implants who were seen in the virtual multidisciplinary clinic from March 18th, 2020 to May 27th, 2020 (Virtual Visit Group, N = 43). A historical cohort of HF patients with CRT devices seen in the ReACT clinic in person during the same calendar time period in 2019 was used as a control group (In-Person Visit Group, N = 39). Both groups were followed until July 1st of the same calendar year (2020 or 2019) for clinical events. The primary outcome measure was a combined outcome of all-cause mortality and HF- or device-related hospitalizations during follow-up. The secondary outcome measures included patient satisfaction, COVID-19 infection, and other cardiovascular events. RESULTS: In the Virtual-Visit Group, 21 patients (48.8%) had their initial ReACT clinic visit (first visit after CRT implant) as a virtual visit; 22 patients (51.2%) had prior in-person ReACT clinic visits before the first virtual visit. During the virtual visits, 12 patients had either potential cardiac symptoms or significant device interrogation findings that required clinical intervention. In post-virtual clinic patient satisfaction survey, all 22 patients surveyed (100%) reported being very satisfied or satisfied with the overall experience of the virtual clinic, and every patient (100%) said they would like to use telemedicine again. During a median follow-up period of 82 days (interquartile range [IQR] 61-96 days), one patient died from pneumonia of unclear etiology at an outside hospital, without documentation of COVID-19 positivity. No patient was hospitalized for HF- or arrhythmia-related complications. No patient was diagnosed with COVID-19. Compared with the In-Person Visit Group, there was no significant increase in mortality or major cardiovascular events in the Virtual-Visit Group (2.3% versus 5.1%, P = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Virtual multidisciplinary care was feasible for HF patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices and achieved good patient satisfaction. Virtual care was not associated with short-term increase in adverse events for HF patients with CRT device during the COVID-19 Pandemic. This virtual care model could help promote the adoption of digital health methodology for high-risk patients with multiple cardiac comorbidities.

The anatomic and electrical location of the left ventricular lead predicts ventricular arrhythmia in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: Both anatomic and electrical locations of the left ventricular (LV) lead have been identified as important predictors of clinical outcomes in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The impact of LV lead location on incident device-treated ventricular arrhythmia (VA), however, is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between electrical and anatomic LV lead location and device treated VAs in CRT. METHODS: Sixty-nine patients undergoing CRT implantation for standard indications were evaluated. Anatomic LV lead location was assessed by means of coronary venography and chest radiography and categorized as apical or nonapical. Electrical LV lead location was assessed by LV electrical delay (LVLED) and was calculated as the time between the onset of the native QRS on the surface electrocardiogram and sensed signal on the LV lead during implantation and corrected for native QRS. Incident appropriate device-treated VA was assessed via device interrogation. RESULTS: Apical lead placement was an independent predictor of VAs (hazard ratio 5.29; 95% confidence interval 1.69-16.5; P = .004). Among patients with a nonapical lead, LVLED<50% native QRS was an independent predictor of VAs (hazard ratio 6.90; 95% confidence interval 1.53-31.1; P = .012). Those with a nonapical lead and LVLED ≥ 50% native QRS were at substantially lower risk for first incident and recurrent VAs when compared to all other patients. CONCLUSIONS: The apical lead position is associated with an increased risk of VAs in CRT patients. Among patients with a nonapical lead position, an LVLED of<50% of the native QRS is associated with an increased risk of VAs.

A novel pacing method to suppress repolarization alternans in vivo: implications for arrhythmia prevention.

BACKGROUND: Repolarization alternans (RA), a pattern of ventricular repolarization that repeats on an every other beat basis, has been closely linked with the substrate associated with ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a novel method to suppress RA. METHODS: We have developed a novel method to dynamically (on R-wave detection) trigger pacing pulses during the absolute refractory period. We have tested the ability of this method to control RA in a structurally normal swine heart in vivo. RESULTS: RA induced by triggered pacing can be measured from both intracardiac and body surface leads and the amplitude of R-wave triggered pacing-induced alternans can be locally modulated by varying the amplitude and width of the pacing pulse. We have estimated that to induce a 1 µV change in alternans voltage on the body surface, coronary sinus, and left ventricle leads, a triggered pacing pulse delivered in the right ventricle of 0.04±0.02, 0.05±0.025, and 0.06±0.033 µC, respectively, is required. Similarly, to induce a 1 unit change in Kscore (ratio of alternans peak to noise), a pacing stimulus of 0.93±0.73, 0.32±0.29, and 0.33±0.37 µC, respectively, is required. We have been able to demonstrate that RA can be suppressed by R-wave triggered pacing from a site that is within or across ventricles. Lastly, we have demonstrated that the proposed method can be used to suppress spontaneously occurring alternans in the diseased heart. CONCLUSION: We have developed a novel method to suppress RA in vivo.

Left ventricular lead proximity to an akinetic segment and impact on outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies report that the optimal pacing site for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is along the left ventricular (LV) lateral and postero-lateral (PL) wall. However, little is known regarding whether pacing over an akinetic site impacts the contractile response and long-term outcome from CRT. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 38 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy were studied for their acute hemodynamic and 12-month clinical response to CRT. The intraindividual percentage change in dP/dt (%DeltadP/dt), over baseline, was derived from the mitral regurgitation (MR) Doppler profile with CRT on versus off. Two-dimensional echocardiography was used for myocardial segmentation and determinination of akinetic sites. LV lead implant site was determined using angiographic and radiographic data and categorized as being "on" (group 1) or "off" (group 2) an akinetic site. Long-term response was measured as a combined endpoint of hospitalization for heart failure and/or all cause mortality at 12 months. Time to primary endpoint was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Clinical characteristics and acute hemodynamic response was similar in both (group 1 [n = 14]; %DeltadP/dt 48.8 +/- 67.4% vs group 2 [n = 24]; %DeltadP/dt 32.2 +/- 40.1%, P = 0.92). No difference in long-term outcome was observed (P = 0.59). In contrast, lead placement in PL or mid-lateral (ML) positions was associated with a better acute hemodynamic response when compared to antero-lateral (AL) positions (PL, %DeltadP/dt 45.7 +/- 50.7% and ML, %DeltadP/dt 45.1 +/- 58.8% vs AL, %DeltadP/dt 2.9 +/- 30.9%, respectively, P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: LV lead proximity to an akinetic segment does not impact acute hemodynamic or 12-month clinical response to CRT.