ABSTRACT
AIMS: Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is effective in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) and a wide QRS interval, a substantial proportion of patients remain non-responsive. The SonR contractility sensor embedded in the right atrial lead enables individualized automatic optimization of the atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) timings. The RESPOND-CRT study investigated the safety and efficacy of the contractility sensor system in HF patients undergoing CRT. METHODS AND RESULTS: RESPOND-CRT was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. Patients were randomized (2:1, respectively) to receive weekly, automatic CRT optimization with SonR vs. an Echo-guided optimization of AV and VV timings. The primary efficacy endpoint was the rate of clinical responders (patients alive, without adjudicated HF-related events, with improvement in New York Heart Association class or quality of life), at 12 months. The study randomized 998 patients. Responder rates were 75.0% in the SonR arm and 70.4% in the Echo arm (mean difference, 4.6%; 95% CI, -1.4% to 10.6%; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority margin -10.0%) (Table 2). At an overall mean follow-up of 548 ± 190 days SonR was associated with a 35% risk reduction in HF hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92; log-rank P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Automatic AV and VV optimization using the contractility sensor was safe and as effective as Echo-guided AV and VV optimization in increasing response to CRT. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT01534234.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices , Heart Failure, Systolic/therapy , Aged , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy/methods , Double-Blind Method , Equipment Design , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Heart Failure, Systolic/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Myocardial Contraction/physiology , Prospective Studies , Stroke Volume/physiology , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is effective in most patients with heart failure (HF) and ventricular dyssynchrony, a significant minority of patients (approximately 30%) are non-responders. Optimal atrioventricular and interventricular delays often change over time and reprogramming these intervals might increase CRT effectiveness. The SonR algorithm automatically optimizes atrioventricular and interventricular intervals each week using an accelerometer to measure change in the SonR signal, which was shown previously to correlate with hemodynamic improvement (left ventricular [LV] dP/dtmax). The RESPOND CRT trial will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the SonR optimization system in patients with HF New York Heart Association class III or ambulatory IV eligible for a CRT-D device. Enrolled patients will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either SonR CRT optimization or to a control arm employing echocardiographic optimization. All patients will be followed for at least 24 months in a double-blinded fashion. The primary effectiveness end point will be evaluated for non-inferiority, with a nested test of superiority, based on the proportion of responders (defined as alive, free from HF-related events, with improvements in New York Heart Association class or improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire quality of life score) at 12 months. The required sample size is 876 patients. The two primary safety end points are acute and chronic SonR lead-related complication rates, respectively. Secondary end points include proportion of patients free from death or HF hospitalization, proportion of patients worsened, and lead electrical performance, assessed at 12 months. The RESPOND CRT trial will also examine associated reverse remodeling at 1 year.
Subject(s)
Algorithms , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy/standards , Electrocardiography , Heart Failure/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIMS: Non-response rate to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) might be decreased by optimizing device programming. The Clinical Evaluation on Advanced Resynchronization (CLEAR) study aimed to assess the effects of CRT with automatically optimized atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) delays, based on a Peak Endocardial Acceleration (PEA) signal system. METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicentre, single-blind study randomized patients in a 1 : 1 ratio to CRT optimized either automatically by the PEA-based system, or according to centres' usual practices, mostly by echocardiography. Patients had heart failure (HF) New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III/IV, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <35%, QRS duration >150 or >120 ms with mechanical dyssynchrony. Follow-up was 1 year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who improved their condition at 1 year, based on a composite of all-cause death, HF hospitalizations, NYHA class, and quality of life. In all, 268 patients in sinus rhythm (63% men; mean age: 73.1 ± 9.9 years; mean NYHA: 3.0 ± 0.3; mean LVEF: 27.1 ± 8.1%; and mean QRS duration: 160.1 ± 22.0 ms) were included and 238 patients were randomized, 123 to PEA and 115 to the control group. At 1 year, 76% of patients assigned to PEA were classified as improved, vs. 62% in the control group (P= 0.0285). The percentage of patients with improved NYHA class was significantly (P= 0.0020) higher in the PEA group than in controls. Fatal and non-fatal adverse events were evenly distributed between the groups. CONCLUSION: PEA-based optimization of CRT in HF patients significantly increased the proportion of patients who improved with therapy, mainly through improved NYHA class, after 1 year of follow-up.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy/methods , Endocardium/physiopathology , Heart Failure/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cause of Death , Electrocardiography , Female , Heart Failure/mortality , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Quality of Life , Stroke Volume/physiology , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The OPTION (Optimal Anti-Tachycardia Therapy in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Patients Without Pacing Indications) trial sought to compare long-term rates of inappropriate shocks, mortality, and morbidity between dual-chamber and single-chamber settings in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) patients. BACKGROUND: The use of dual-chamber ICDs potentially allows better discrimination of supraventricular arrhythmias and thereby reduces inappropriate shocks. However, it may lead to detrimental ventricular pacing. METHODS: This prospective multicenter, single-blinded trial enrolled 462 patients with de novo primary or secondary prevention indications for ICD placement and with left ventricular ejection fractions ≤40% despite optimal tolerated pharmacotherapy. All patients received atrial leads and dual-chamber defibrillators that were randomized to be programmed either with dual-chamber or single-chamber settings. In the dual-chamber setting arm, the PARAD+ algorithm, which differentiates supraventricular from ventricular arrhythmias, and SafeR mode, to minimize ventricular pacing, were activated. In the single-chamber setting arm, the acceleration, stability, and long cycle search discrimination criteria were activated, and pacing was set to VVI 40 beats/min. Ventricular tachycardia detection was required at rates between 170 and 200 beats/min, and ventricular fibrillation detection was activated above 200 beats/min. RESULTS: During a follow-up period of 27 months, the time to the first inappropriate shock was significantly longer in the dual-chamber setting arm (p = 0.012, log-rank test), and 4.3% of patients in the dual-chamber setting group compared with 10.3% in the single-chamber setting group experienced inappropriate shocks (p = 0.015). Rates of all-cause death or cardiovascular hospitalization were 20% for the dual-chamber setting group and 22.4% for the single-chamber setting group and satisfied the pre-defined margin for equivalence (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Therapy with dual-chamber settings for ICD discrimination combined with algorithms for minimizing ventricular pacing was associated with reduced risk for inappropriate shock compared with single-chamber settings, without increases in mortality and morbidity. (Optimal Anti-Tachycardia Therapy in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator [ICD] Patients Without Pacing Indications [OPTION]; NCT00729703).