Closed Loop Stimulation reduces the incidence of atrial high-rate episodes compared to conventional rate-adaptive pacing in patients with sinus node dysfunctions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subclinical atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased risk of progression to clinical AF, stroke, and cardiovascular death. We hypothesized that in pacemaker patients requiring dual-chamber rate-adaptive (DDDR) pacing, Closed Loop Stimulation (CLS) integrated into the circulatory control system through intracardiac impedance monitoring would reduce the occurrence of atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) compared to conventional DDDR pacing. METHODS: Patients with sinus node dysfunctions (SND) and an implanted pacemaker or defibrillator were randomly allocated to dual-chamber CLS (n=612) or accelerometer-based DDDR pacing (n=598) and followed for 3 years. The primary endpoint was time to the composite endpoint of first AHRE lasting ≥6 minutes, stroke, or transient ischemic attack (TIA). All AHREs were independently adjudicated using intracardiac electrograms. RESULTS: The incidence of the primary endpoint was lower in the CLS arm (50.6%) than in the DDDR arm (55.7%), primarily due to the reduction in AHREs lasting between 6 hours and 7 days. Unadjusted site-stratified hazard ratio (HR) for CLS versus DDDR was 0.84 (95%-CI, 0.72-0.99; p=0.035). After adjusting for CHA2DS2-VASc score, the HR remained 0.84 (95%-CI, 0.71-0.99; p=0.033). In subgroup analyses, the incremental benefit of CLS was greatest in patients without atrioventricular block (HR, 0.76; p=0.006) and in patients without AF history (HR, 0.73; p=0.010). The contribution of stroke/TIA to the primary endpoint (1.3%) was low and not statistically different between study arms. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-chamber CLS in patients with SND is associated with a significantly lower AHRE incidence than conventional DDDR pacing.

Performance of a multi-sensor implantable defibrillator algorithm for heart failure monitoring in the presence of atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: The HeartLogic Index combines data from multiple implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) sensors and has been shown to accurately stratify patients at risk of heart failure (HF) events. We evaluated and compared the performance of this algorithm during sinus rhythm and during long-lasting atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: HeartLogic was activated in 568 ICD patients from 26 centres. We found periods of ≥30 consecutive days with an atrial high-rate episode (AHRE) burden <1 h/day and periods with an AHRE burden ≥20 h/day. We then identified patients who met both criteria during the follow-up (AHRE group, n = 53), to allow pairwise comparison of periods. For control purposes, we identified patients with an AHRE burden <1 h throughout their follow-up and implemented 2:1 propensity score matching vs. the AHRE group (matched non-AHRE group, n = 106). In the AHRE group, the rate of alerts was 1.2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-1.5]/patient-year during periods with an AHRE burden <1 h/day and 2.0 (95% CI: 1.5-2.6)/patient-year during periods with an AHRE-burden ≥20 h/day (P = 0.004). The rate of HF hospitalizations was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15-0.69)/patient-year during IN-alert periods and 0.06 (95% CI: 0.02-0.14)/patient-year during OUT-of-alert periods (P < 0.001). The IN/OUT-of-alert state incidence rate ratio of HF hospitalizations was 8.59 (95% CI: 1.67-55.31) during periods with an AHRE burden <1 h/day and 2.70 (95% CI: 1.01-28.33) during periods with an AHRE burden ≥20 h/day. In the matched non-AHRE group, the rate of HF hospitalizations was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.12-0.60)/patient-year during IN-alert periods and 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.08)/patient-year during OUT-of-alert periods (P < 0.001). The incidence rate ratio was 7.11 (95% CI: 2.19-22.44). CONCLUSION: Patients received more alerts during periods of AF. The ability of the algorithm to identify increased risk of HF events was confirmed during AF, despite a lower IN/OUT-of-alert incidence rate ratio in comparison with non-AF periods and non-AF patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.

Combining home monitoring temporal trends from implanted defibrillators and baseline patient risk profile to predict heart failure hospitalizations: results from the SELENE HF study.

AIMS: We developed and validated an algorithm for prediction of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations using remote monitoring (RM) data transmitted by implanted defibrillators. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SELENE HF study enrolled 918 patients (median age 69 years, 81% men, median ejection fraction 30%) with cardiac resynchronization therapy (44%), dual-chamber (38%), or single-chamber defibrillators with atrial diagnostics (18%). To develop a predictive algorithm, temporal trends of diurnal and nocturnal heart rates, ventricular extrasystoles, atrial tachyarrhythmia burden, heart rate variability, physical activity, and thoracic impedance obtained by daily automatic RM were combined with a baseline risk-stratifier (Seattle HF Model) into one index. The primary endpoint was the first post-implant adjudicated HF hospitalization. After a median follow-up of 22.5 months since enrolment, patients were randomly allocated to the algorithm derivation group (n = 457; 31 endpoints) or algorithm validation group (n = 461; 29 endpoints). In the derivation group, the index showed a C-statistics of 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-0.95] with 2.73 odds ratio (CI 1.98-3.78) for first HF hospitalization per unitary increase of index value (P < 0.001). In the validation group, sensitivity of predicting primary endpoint was 65.5% (CI 45.7-82.1%), median alerting time 42 days (interquartile range 21-89), and false (or unexplained) alert rate 0.69 (CI 0.64-0.74) [or 0.63 (CI 0.58-0.68)] per patient-year. Without the baseline risk-stratifier, the sensitivity remained 65.5% and the false/unexplained alert rates increased by ≈10% to 0.76/0.71 per patient-year. CONCLUSION: With the developed algorithm, two-thirds of first post-implant HF hospitalizations could be predicted timely with only 0.7 false alerts per patient-year.

The Italian subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator survey: S-ICD, why not?

AIMS: A recommendation for a subcutaneous-implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) has been added to recent European Society of Cardiology Guidelines. However, the S-ICD is not ideally suitable for patients who need pacing. The aim of this survey was to analyse the current practice of ICD implantation and to evaluate the actual suitability of S-ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: The survey 'S-ICD Why Not?' was an independent initiative taken by the Italian Heart Rhythm Society (AIAC). Clinical characteristics, selection criteria, and factors guiding the choice of ICD type were collected in consecutive patients who underwent ICD implantation in 33 Italian centres from September to December 2015. A cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device was implanted in 39% (369 of 947) of patients undergoing de novo ICD implantation. An S-ICD was implanted in 12% of patients with no CRT indication (62 of 510 with available data). S-ICD patients were younger than patients who received transvenous ICD, more often had channelopathies, and more frequently received their device for secondary prevention of sudden death. More frequently, the clinical reason for preferring a transvenous ICD over an S-ICD was the need for pacing (45%) or for antitachycardia pacing (36%). Nonetheless, only 7% of patients fulfilled conditions for recommending permanent pacing, and 4% of patients had a history of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia that might have been treatable with antitachycardia pacing. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of patients needing ICD therapy are suitable candidates for S-ICD implantation. Nevertheless, it currently seems to be preferentially adopted for secondary prevention of sudden death in young patients with channelopathies.

Integration of a Smartphone HF-Dedicated App in the Remote Monitoring of Heart Failure Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Patient Access, Acceptance, and Adherence to Use.

(200 w) Introduction. Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) diagnostics helps to identify patients potentially at risk of worsening heart failure (HF). Additionally, knowledge of patient HF-related symptoms is crucial for decision making. Patient smartphone applications may represent an ideal option to remotely collect this information. PURPOSE: To assess real-world HF patient access, acceptance, and adherence to use of an HF-dedicated smartphone application (HF app). METHODS: In this study, 10 Italian hospitals administered a survey on smartphone/app use to HF patients with CIED. The subgroup who accepted it downloaded the HF app. Mean 1-year adherence of the HF app use was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 495 patients (67 ± 13 years, 79% males, 26% NYHA III-IV) completed the survey, of which 84% had access to smartphones and 85% were willing to use the HF app. In total, 311/495 (63%) downloaded the HF app. Patients who downloaded the HF app were younger and had higher school qualification. Patients who were ≥60 years old had higher mean 1-year adherence (54.1%) than their younger counterparts (42.7%; p < 0.001). Hospitals with RM-dedicated staff had higher mean 1-year patient adherence (64.0% vs. 33.5%; p < 0.001). Adherence to HF app decreased from 63.3% (weeks_1-13) to 42.2% (weeks_40-52, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: High access and acceptance of smartphones/apps by HF patients with CIED allow HF app use for RM of patient signs/symptoms. Younger patients with higher school qualifications are more likely to accept HF app; however, older patients have higher long-term adherence.

Performance of a multisensor implantable defibrillator algorithm for heart failure monitoring related to co-morbidities.

AIMS: The HeartLogic algorithm combines multiple implantable defibrillator (ICD) sensor data and has proved to be a sensitive and timely predictor of impending heart failure (HF) decompensation in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) patients. We evaluated the performance of this algorithm in non-CRT ICD patients and in the presence of co-morbidities. METHODS AND RESULTS: The HeartLogic feature was activated in 568 ICD patients (410 with CRT-D) from 26 centres. The median follow-up was 26 months [25th-75th percentile: 16-37]. During follow-up, 97 hospitalizations were reported (53 cardiovascular) and 55 patients died. We recorded 1200 HeartLogic alerts in 370 patients. Overall, the time IN the alert state was 13% of the total observation period. The rate of cardiovascular hospitalizations or death was 0.48/patient-year (95% CI: 0.37-0.60) with the HeartLogic IN the alert state and 0.04/patient-year (95% CI: 0.03-0.05) OUT of the alert state, with an incidence rate ratio of 13.35 (95% CI: 8.83-20.51, P < 0.001). Among patient characteristics, atrial fibrillation (AF) on implantation (HR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.27-2.07, P < 0.001) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) (HR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.21-1.93, P < 0.001) independently predicted alerts. HeartLogic alerts were not associated with CRT-D versus ICD implantation (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.82-1.30, P = 0.775). Comparisons of the clinical event rates in the IN alert state with those in the OUT of alert state yielded incidence rate ratios ranging from 9.72 to 14.54 (all P < 0.001) in all groups of patients stratified by: CRT-D/ICD, AF/non-AF, and CKD/non-CKD. After multivariate correction, the occurrence of alerts was associated with cardiovascular hospitalization or death (HR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.05-3.51, P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of HeartLogic alerts was similar between CRT-D and ICD patients, while patients with AF and CKD seemed more exposed to alerts. Nonetheless, the ability of the HeartLogic algorithm to identify periods of significantly increased risk of clinical events was confirmed, regardless of the type of device and the presence of AF or CKD.

Predicting all-cause mortality by means of a multisensor implantable defibrillator algorithm for heart failure monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The HeartLogic algorithm (Boston Scientific) has proved to be a sensitive and timely predictor of impending heart failure (HF) decompensation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether remotely monitored data from this algorithm could be used to identify patients at high risk for mortality. METHODS: The algorithm combines implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)-measured accelerometer-based heart sounds, intrathoracic impedance, respiration rate, ratio of respiration rate to tidal volume, night heart rate, and patient activity into a single index. An alert is issued when the index crosses a programmable threshold. The feature was activated in 568 ICD patients from 26 centers. RESULTS: During median follow-up of 26 months [25th-75th percentile 16-37], 1200 alerts were recorded in 370 patients (65%). Overall, the time IN-alert state was 13% of the total observation period (151/1159 years) and 20% of the follow-up period of the 370 patients with alerts. During follow-up, 55 patients died (46 in the group with alerts). The rate of death was 0.25 per patient-year (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.34) IN-alert state and 0.02 per patient-year (95% CI 0.01-0.03) OUT of the alert state, with an incidence rate ratio of 13.72 (95% CI 7.62-25.60; P <.001). After multivariate correction for baseline confounders (age, ischemic cardiomyopathy, kidney disease, atrial fibrillation), the IN-alert state remained significantly associated with the occurrence of death (hazard ratio 9.18; 95% CI 5.27-15.99; P <.001). CONCLUSION: The HeartLogic algorithm provides an index that can be used to identify patients at higher risk for all-cause mortality. The index state identifies periods of significantly increased risk of death.

[Device therapy in chronic heart failure: a case of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy treated with cardiac contractility modulation therapy]. / Device therapy nello scompenso cardiaco cronico: un caso di cardiomiopatia ipertrofica trattato con terapia di modulazione della contrattilità cardiaca.

Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) currently represents an innovative therapeutic strategy to improve quality of life and reduce hospitalizations in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In contemporary practice, a substantial proportion of patients with heart failure unfortunately remains symptomatic despite guideline-recommended pharmacological therapy and implantation of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Such patients represent possible candidates for the use of CCM therapy with the goal of improving symptoms, ventricular function and, ultimately, prognosis. In this case report, we describe, for the first time, the use of CCM therapy in a patient with non-obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and symptomatic chronic heart failure despite optimal medical therapy and CRT.

Association Between Device-Detected Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Implantable Defibrillator Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Sleep-disordered breathing is highly prevalent in heart failure (HF) and has been suggested as a risk factor for malignant ventricular arrhythmias. The Respiratory Disturbance Index (RDI) computed by an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) algorithm accurately identifies severe sleep apnea. OBJECTIVES: In the present analysis, the authors evaluated the association between ICD-detected sleep apnea and the incidence of appropriate ICD therapies in patients with HF. METHODS: We enrolled 411 HF patients who had received an ICD endowed with an algorithm that calculates the RDI each night. In this analysis, the weekly mean RDI value was considered. The endpoint was the first appropriate ICD shock. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 26 months (25th to 75th percentile: 16-35 months). During follow-up, 1 or more ICD shocks were documented in 58 (14%) patients. Patients with shocks were younger (age 66 ± 13 years vs 70 ± 10 years; P = 0.038), and had more frequently undergone implantation for secondary prevention (21% vs 10%; P = 0.026). The maximum RDI value calculated during the entire follow-up period did not differ between patients with and without shocks (55 ± 15 episodes/h vs 54 ± 14 episodes/h; P = 0.539). However, the ICD-detected RDI showed considerable variability during follow-up. The overall median of the weekly RDI was 33 episodes/h (25th to 75th percentile: 24-45 episodes/h). A time-dependent Cox regression model revealed that a continuously measured weekly mean RDI of ≥45 episodes/h was independently associated with shock occurrence (HR: 4.63; 95% CI: 2.54-8.43; P < 0.001), after correction for baseline confounders (age, secondary prevention). CONCLUSIONS: In HF patients, appropriate ICD shocks were more likely to be delivered during periods when patients exhibited more sleep-disordered breathing. (Arrhythmias Detection in a Real World Population [RHYTHM DETECT]; NCT02275637).

Multiparametric Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Algorithm for Heart Failure Risk Stratification and Management: An Analysis in Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: The HeartLogic algorithm combines multiple implantable cardioverter-defibrillator sensors to identify patients at risk of heart failure (HF) events. We sought to evaluate the risk stratification ability of this algorithm in clinical practice. We also analyzed the alert management strategies adopted in the study group and their association with the occurrence of HF events. METHODS: The HeartLogic feature was activated in 366 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients at 22 centers. The median follow-up was 11 months [25th-75th percentile: 6-16]. The HeartLogic algorithm calculates a daily HF index and identifies periods IN alert state on the basis of a configurable threshold. RESULTS: The HeartLogic index crossed the threshold value 273 times (0.76 alerts/patient-year) in 150 patients. The time IN alert state was 11% of the total observation period. Patients experienced 36 HF hospitalizations, and 8 patients died of HF during the observation period. Thirty-five events were associated with the IN alert state (0.92 events/patient-year versus 0.03 events/patient-year in the OUT of alert state). The hazard ratio in the IN/OUT of alert state comparison was (hazard ratio, 24.53 [95% CI, 8.55-70.38], P<0.001), after adjustment for baseline clinical confounders. Alerts followed by clinical actions were associated with less HF events (hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.14-0.99], P=0.047). No differences in event rates were observed between in-office and remote alert management. CONCLUSIONS: This multiparametric algorithm identifies patients during periods of significantly increased risk of HF events. The rate of HF events seemed lower when clinical actions were undertaken in response to alerts. Extra in-office visits did not seem to be required to effectively manage HeartLogic alerts. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02275637.

Design and rationale of the Impact of MultiPoint pacing in CRT patients with reduced RV-to-LV delay (IMAGE-CRT) study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment in patients with heart failure and prolonged QRS duration. A biventricular device is implanted to achieve faster activation and more synchronous contraction of the ventricles. Despite the convincing effect of CRT, 30-40% of patients do not respond. We decided to investigate the role of multipoint pacing (MPP) in a selected group of patients with right ventricle (RV)-to-left ventricle (LV) intervals less than 80 ms that do not respond to traditional CRT. METHODS: We will enrol 248 patients in this patient-blinded, observational, clinical study aiming to investigate if MPP could decrease LV end-systolic volume (ESV) in patients with RV-to-LV interval less than 80 ms. MPP will be activated ON at implant in patients with RV-to-LV delay less than 80 ms and OFF in RV-to-LV at least 80 ms. At follow-up the activation of MPP will be related to CRT response. The primary study endpoint will be the responder rate at 6 months, defined as a decrease in LV ejection fraction, LV end-diastolic volume, LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) at least 15% from baseline. Secondary outcomes include 12 months relative percentage reduction in LVESV and a combined clinical outcome measure of response to CRT defined as the patient being alive, no hospitalization due to heart failure, and experiencing an improvement in New York Heart Association functional class (Composite-Score). CONCLUSION: Reducing the nonresponder rate continues to be an important goal for CRT.If an increase in reverse remodelling can be achieved by MPP, this study supports the conduct of larger trials investigating the role of MPP on clinical outcomes in selected patients treated, right now, only with traditional CRT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02713308. Registered on 18 March 2016.

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation: An analysis of Italian clinical practice and its evolution.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) is a relatively novel alternative to the transvenous ICD for the treatment of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias, and is currently used in the clinical practice of several centers. The aim of this analysis was to describe current Italian practice regarding S-ICD implantation and its evolution over the years. METHODS: We analyzed 607 consecutive patients (78% male, 48 ±â€¯16 years) who underwent S-ICD implantation in 39 Italian centers from 2013 to 2017. RESULTS: Structural cardiomyopathy was present in 78% of patients and 30% of patients received their device for secondary prevention. The proportion of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% increased from ≤2014 to 2017 (from 38% to 58%, from 33% to 53%, respectively; both p < 0.05). Almost all procedures (97%) were performed in electrophysiology laboratories. Over the last 4 years, the 2-incision implantation technique has been widely adopted, with sub- or inter-muscular positioning of the generator, under local anesthesia or deep sedation (≤2014 versus 2017: all p < 0.001). Defibrillation testing was performed in 81% of patients. Shock energy of ≤65 J was successful in 93.9% of patients and the overall cardioversion success rate at ≤80 J was 99.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis confirmed that the S-ICD continues to be preferentially used in specific patients (younger, less frequently with dilated cardiomyopathy and low ejection fraction.). Nonetheless, we noted a trend toward the wider use of S-ICD in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and systolic dysfunction over the years. Novel approaches have been adopted while the acute efficacy of the system has remained stably high.

[Variations in QRS duration and axis with different sites and intervals of right ventricular pacing]. / Variazioni della durata e dell'asse del QRS con differenti siti ed intervalli di stimolazione in ventricolo destro.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to achieve left ventricular resynchronization by means of right ventricular pacing. METHODS: We studied 12 patients (9 males, 3 females, mean age 61.7 +/- 19.5 years), with syncope, II degree atrioventricular block or ventricular arrhythmias, without intraventricular conduction disturbances. Single and dual site pacing, synchrony or at different delay, was made in the right ventricular, outflow tract from the apex, and midseptal areas. RESULTS: In all patients we obtained the shortest QRS duration with synchrony or delayed bisite pacing (standard ventricular apex pacing 170 +/- 20 ms; bisite pacing 137 +/- 13 ms). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that appropriate right ventricular pacing can lead to left ventricular resynchronization.

Prevention of syncope through permanent cardiac pacing in patients with bifascicular block and syncope of unexplained origin: the PRESS study.

BACKGROUND: Syncope in patients with bifascicular block (BFB) is a common event whose causes might be difficult to assess. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prevention of syncope through permanent cardiac pacing in patients with bifascicular block (PRESS) is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blinded study designed to demonstrate a reduction in symptomatic events in patients with bifascicular block and syncope of undetermined origin implanted with permanent pacemaker. Device programming mode (NASPE/BPEG code) at DDD with a lower rate of 60 ppm is compared with backup pacing at DDI with a lower rate of 30 ppm. The end point consisted of (1) syncope, (2) symptomatic presyncopal episodes associated with a device intervention (ventricular pacing), and (3) symptomatic episodes associated with intermittent or permanent atrioventricular block (any degree). One hundred one patients were enrolled and randomized. Primary end point events at 2 years were observed in 23 patients, with a significant lower incidence in the study group (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.96; P=0.042). Reduction of any symptoms, associated or not with device intervention, was superior in DDD60 compared with DDI30 (hazard ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.78; P=0.0053). Fourteen patients developed other rhythm diseases and met class I indication for pacing. The annual incidence of rhythm disease development was 7.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with bifascicular block and syncope of undetermined origin, the use of a dual chamber pacemaker programmed to DDD60 led to a significant reduction of syncope or symptomatic events associated with a cardioinhibitory origin, compared with DDI30 programming. Symptoms associated with a new onset of rhythm disease were found in 15% of the population at 2 years.