RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Our study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) depending on HF etiology. METHODS: We enrolled 166 patients with optimal medical therapy-resistant HFrEF (median age 59 years, 83.7% males, median NYHA class - 2, median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) - 29.0%) who underwent CCM therapy device implantation from 2013 to 2019 in four medical centers in Russia. The HF etiology was determined based on invasive coronary angiography or cardiac MRI data. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), 6-minute walking test (6MWT), and NTproBNP-tests were performed at a baseline and 12 months after the implantation. RESULTS: The ischemic etiology of HF was revealed in 100 patients (61.5%) (ICM group); the non-ischemic group (NICM) evolved 66 patients (38.5%). Patients in the ICM group were significantly older (61[57-69] vs. 55 [42.8-61], p < 0.001), more frequently had hypertension (79% vs. 42.4%, p < 0.001) and chronic kidney disease (43% vs. 22.7%, p = 0.012). Patients in the NICM group had significantly more often atrial fibrillation (AF) (58% vs. 74%, p = 0.048), larger end-diastolic volume (EDV) (249 [208-309] vs. 220 [192-271], p = 0.019) and end-systolic volume (ESV) (183 [147-230] vs. 154 [128-199], p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in mortality between ICM and NICM groups (14.4 vs. 10.8%, p = 0.51). In 12 months, there was a significant increase in LVEF in the NICM group (+ 2.0 [2-6] vs. +7.7 [2-12], p < 0.001), while the improvement in the 6MWT (+ 75 [22-108] vs. +80 [10-160], p = 0.851) and NYHA class did not reach the level of significance. The subanalysis between patients with improved NYHA class and those without improvement revealed that patients without improvement more frequently had AF (56% vs. 89%; p < 0.01), chronic obstructive lung disease (18% vs. 35% p = 0.047), higher blood pressure (110 [105-120] vs. 120[110-129]; p = 0.032). CONCLUSION: In this multicenter retrospective study, patients with non-ischemic HFrEF showed a significantly higher improvement in LVEF and LV reverse remodeling following CCM therapy device implantation. There was no significant association between HF etiology and survival in drug-resistant HFrEF patients following CCM therapy.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Contracción Miocárdica , Recuperación de la Función , Volumen Sistólico , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Resultado del Tratamiento , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Factores de Tiempo , Federación de Rusia , Tolerancia al Ejercicio , Adulto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Fragmentos de Péptidos/sangre , Péptido Natriurético Encefálico/sangre , Estado FuncionalRESUMEN
Cardiac conduction system pacing provides physiological ventricular activation by directly stimulating the conduction system. This review describes the two types of conduction system pacing: His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle area pacing (LBAP). The most significant advantage of HB pacing is that it can provide a regular, narrow QRS; however, the disadvantages are challenging implantation and a high risk of re-intervention due to lead dislodgement and the development of high pacing threshold. LBAP provides optimum physiological activation of the left ventricle by engaging the left bundle/fascicular fibers. LBAP is more physiological than traditional RV apical pacing and could be an attractive alternative to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The advantages of LBAP are a relatively more straightforward implantation technique than HBP, better lead stability and pacing thresholds. HBP and LBAP are more physiological than right ventricular pacing and may be used instead of conventional pacemakers. Both HBP and LBBP are being investigated as alternatives to conventional CRT.
Asunto(s)
Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Fascículo Atrioventricular , Electrocardiografía/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Sistema de Conducción Cardíaco , Terapia de Resincronización Cardíaca/métodos , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial/métodosRESUMEN
Heart failure (HF)is a condition at high risk for orthostatic hypotension (OH)given the large proportion of patients at an advanced age and high burden of comorbidities contributing to OH, as well as a high prevalence of medications with neurovascular and volume modulating properties. Early identification of OH in HF seems to be crucial as OH can have an impact on patient symptoms, activity level and independence, be a marker of specific pathophysiological changes or be an indicator of need for personalized treatment. OH might contribute significantly to bad enough prognosis in HF, as, besides a risk of falls and cognitive decline, it was found to be associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In this review, we aimed to incentivize the routine use of orthostatic testing in HF, as well as stimulate future research in this field, which could lead to significant advances in the treatment and outcomes.