Personalized accelerated physiologic pacing.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasingly prevalent with a high socioeconomic burden. Pharmacological heart rate lowering was recommended to improve ventricular filling in HFpEF. This article discusses the misperceptions that have resulted in an overprescription of beta-blockers, which in all likelihood have untoward effects on patients with HFpEF, even if they have atrial fibrillation or coronary artery disease as a comorbidity. Directly contradicting the lower heart rate paradigm, faster heart rates provide haemodynamic and structural benefits, amongst which lower cardiac filling pressures and improved ventricular capacitance may be most important. Safe delivery of this therapeutic approach is feasible with atrial and ventricular conduction system pacing that aims to emulate or enhance cardiac excitation to maximize the haemodynamic benefits of accelerated pacing. This conceptual framework was first tested in the myPACE randomized controlled trial of patients with pre-existing pacemakers and preclinical or overt HFpEF. This article provides the background and path towards this treatment approach.

Clinical impact of Bachmann's bundle pacing defined by electrocardiographic criteria on atrial arrhythmia outcomes.

AIMS: Evaluate whether Bachmann's bundle pacing (BBp) defined by electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria is associated with less atrial fibrillation/tachycardia (AF/AT) compared with anatomically defined right atrial septal pacing (RASp) and right atrial appendage pacing (RAAp). METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective study comparing BBp with non-specific RASp and RAAp on new incidence, burden, and recurrence of AF/AT. We included patients who underwent atrial lead placement between 2006 and 2019 and received > 20% atrial pacing. BBp was defined by paced P-wave morphology and fluoroscopic lead position. Compared with RASp (n = 107) and RAAp (n = 108), AF/AT burden was lower in the BBp (n = 134) group by repeated measures ANOVA (P < 0.001). Over 2-year follow-up, AF/AT burden increased in the RASp (P < 0.01) and RAAp (P < 0.01) groups but did not significantly change in the BBp group (P = 0.91). Atrial arrhythmia burden was lower in the BBp group than the RASp and RAAp groups at 12-15, 18-21, and 24-27 months (P < 0.05) after pacemaker placement. Risk of AF/AT recurrence was lower in BBp than RASp (HR 0.43; P < 0.01) and RAAp patients (HR 0.29, P < 0.01). Risk of de novo AF/AT was also lower in BBp than in RASp (OR 0.12; P < 0.01) and RAAp patients (OR 0.20, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Bachmann's bundle pacing defined using P-wave criteria was associated with decreased atrial arrhythmia burden, recurrence, and de novo incidence compared with right atrial septal pacing and right atrial appendage pacing.

Platelet reactivity in response to aspirin and ticagrelor in African-Americans and European-Americans.

Platelet gene polymorphisms are associated with variable on-treatment platelet reactivity and vary by race. Whether differences in platelet reactivity and aspirin or ticagrelor exist between African-American and European-Americans remains poorly understood. Biological samples from three prior prospective antiplatelet challenge studies at the Duke Clinical Research Unit were used to compare platelet reactivity between African-American and European-American subjects. Platelet reactivity at baseline, on-aspirin, on-ticagrelor, and the treatment effect of aspirin or ticagrelor were compared between groups using an adjusted mixed effects model. Compared with European-Americans (n = 282; 50% female; mean ± standard deviation age, 50 ± 16), African-Americans (n = 209; 67% female; age 48 ± 12) had lower baseline platelet reactivity with platelet function analyzer-100 (PFA-100) (p < 0.01) and with light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in response to arachidonic acid (AA), adenosine diphosphate (ADP), and epinephrine agonists (p < 0.05). African-Americans had lower platelet reactivity on aspirin in response to ADP, epinephrine, and collagen (p < 0.05) and on ticagrelor in response to AA, ADP, and collagen (p < 0.05). The treatment effect of aspirin was greater in European-Americans with an AA agonist (p = 0.002). Between-race differences with in vitro aspirin mirrored those seen in vivo. The treatment effect of ticagrelor was greater in European-Americans in response to ADP (p < 0.05) but with collagen, the treatment effect was greater for African-Americans (p < 0.05). Platelet reactivity was overall lower in African-Americans off-treatment, on aspirin, and on ticagrelor. European-Americans experienced greater platelet suppression on aspirin and on ticagrelor. The aspirin response difference in vivo and in vitro suggests a mechanism intrinsic to the platelet. Whether the absolute level of platelet reactivity or the degree of platelet suppression after treatment is more important for clinical outcomes is uncertain.

The Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction "Twindemic" - Shared Root Causes and Treatment Targets.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are comorbid conditions that are increasingly prevalent and have a high socioeconomic burden. This article discusses their shared pathophysiology, focusing on the triad of hypertension, obesity, and aging. We highlight the misperception that pharmacologic heart rate lowering is beneficial, which has resulted in an overprescription of beta-blockers in HFpEF and AF. In contrast, heart rate modulation through accelerated pacing provides hemodynamic and structural advantages, which have yielded significant improvements in quality of life, physical activity, and AF burden in the myPACE trial of patients with preclinical or overt HFpEF.

Rationale and design of the PACE HFpEF trial: Physiologic accelerated pacing as a holistic treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Background: In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), it has been assumed that pharmacologic heart rate suppression should provide clinical benefits through an increase in diastolic filling time. Contrary to this assumption, heart rate lowering in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction and hypertension or coronary artery disease results in adverse outcomes and suggests that the opposite may be beneficial. Namely, shortening the diastolic filling time with a higher heart rate might normalize the elevated filling pressures that are the sine qua non of HFpEF. Initial clinical studies that assessed the effects of accelerated heart rates in pacemaker patients with preclinical and overt HFpEF provide support for this latter hypothesis, having shown improvements in quality of life, natriuretic peptide and activity levels, and atrial fibrillation burden. Objective: The study sought to determine the effects of continued resting heart rate elevation with and without superimposed nocturnal pacing in HFpEF patients without standard pacing indication. Methods: The physiologic accelerated pacing as treatment for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (PACE HFpEF) trial is an investigator-initiated, prospective, patient-blinded multiple crossover pilot study that assesses the impact of accelerated pacing on quality of life, physical activity, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and echocardiographic measures of cardiac structure and function. Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and underwent dual-chamber pacemaker implantation under U.S. Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption with both atrial and ventricular physiologic lead placement targeting the Bachmann bundle and the His bundle. Conclusion: This manuscript describes the rationale and design of the PACE HFpEF trial, which tests the safety and feasibility of continuous accelerated physiological pacing as a treatment strategy in HFpEF.

Effect of paced heart rate on quality of life and natriuretic peptides for stage B or C heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A secondary analysis of the myPACE trial.

AIM: Emerging evidence suggests a beneficial effect of higher heart rates in some patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of higher backup pacing rates in HFpEF patients with preexisting pacemaker systems that limit pacemaker-mediated dyssynchrony across left ventricular (LV) volumes and LV ejection fraction (LVEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the myPACE clinical trial that evaluated the effects of personalized accelerated pacing setting (myPACE) versus standard of care on changes in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), pacemaker-detected activity levels, and atrial fibrillation (AF) burden in patients with HFpEF with preexisting pacemakers. Between-treatment comparisons were performed using linear regression models adjusting for the baseline value of the exposure (ANCOVA design). This study included 93 patients with pre-trial transthoracic echocardiograms available (usual care n = 49; myPACE n = 44). NT-proBNP levels and MLHFQ scores improved in a higher magnitude in the myPACE group at lower indexed LV end-diastolic volumes (iLVEDV) (NT-proBNP-iLVEDV interaction p = 0.006; MLHFQ-iLVEDV interaction p = 0.068). In addition, personalized accelerated pacing led to improved changes in activity levels and NT-proBNP, especially at higher LVEF (activity levels-LVEF interaction p = 0.009; NT-proBNP-LVEF interaction p = 0.058). No evidence of heterogeneity was found across LV volumes or LVEF for pacemaker-detected AF burden. CONCLUSIONS: In the post-hoc analysis of the myPACE trial, we observed that the benefits of a personalized accelerated backup pacing on MLHFQ score, NT-proBNP, and pacemaker-detected activity levels appear to be more pronounced in patients with smaller iLVEDV and higher LVEF.

Effects of Continuous Accelerated Pacing on Cardiac Structure and Function in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Insights From the myPACE Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction ≥50% is prevalent with few evidence-based therapies. In a trial of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction with specialized pacemakers, treatment with accelerated personalized pacing averaging 75 bpm (myPACE) markedly improved quality of life, NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide), physical activity, and atrial fibrillation burden compared with the standard lower rate setting of 60 bpm (usual care). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this exploratory study, provider-initiated echocardiographic studies obtained before and after the trial were assessed for changes in left ventricular (LV) structure and function among participants who continued their pacing assignment. The analytic approach aimed to detect differences in standard and advanced echocardiographic parameters within and between study arms. Of the 100 participants, 16 myPACE and 20 usual care arm had a qualifying set of echocardiograms performed a mean (SD) 3 (2.0) years apart. Despite similar baseline echocardiogram measures, sustained exposure to moderately accelerated pacing resulted in reduced septal wall thickness (in cm: myPACE 1.1 [0.2] versus usual care 1.2 [0.2], P=0.008) and lower LV mass to systolic volume ratio (in g/mL: myPACE 4.8 [1.9] versus usual care 6.8 [3.1], P=0.038) accompanied by a minor reduction in LV ejection fraction (in %: myPACE 55 [5] versus usual care 60 [5], P=0.015). These changes were paralleled by improvements in heart failure-related quality of life (myPACE Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire improved by 16.1 [13.9] points, whereas usual care worsened by 6.9 [11.6] points, P<0.001). Markers of diastolic function and LV performance were not affected. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to continuous accelerated pacing in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is associated with a reduced LV wall thickness and a small amount of LV dilation with small reduction in ejection fraction.

Nationwide Trends in Hospitalizations for Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter in the United States before and during the Outbreak of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background/Objectives: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and flutter (AFL) are the most common cardiac arrhythmias worldwide. Cardiovascular complications are a common manifestation of acute and post-acute COVID-19 infection. We aimed to analyze the nationwide trends in clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients hospitalized for AF/AFL before and during the COVID-19 outbreak in the U.S. Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of patients, aged 18 and older, hospitalized for AF/AFL in the U.S. between 2016 and 2020. We drew data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Baseline sociodemographic and clinical data, as well as outcomes including stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and mortality, were analyzed. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent associations between the different clinical and demographic characteristics and the composite endpoint of Mortality/ACS/Stroke. Results: An estimated total of 2,163,699 hospitalizations for AF/AFL were identified. The hospitalization volume between 2016 and 2019 was stable, averaging 465,176 a year, followed by a significant drop to 302,995 in 2020. Patients' median age was 72 years (IQR 62-80), 50.9% were male, and 81.5% were white. The composite endpoint steadily increased from 6.5% in 2016 to 11.8% in 2020 (Ptrend < 0.001). In a multivariable regression analysis, age > 75 (OR: 1.35; 95% CI 1.304-1.399, p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (OR: 1.466; 95% CI: 1.451-1.481; p < 0.001), and chronic kidney disease (OR: 1.635; 95% CI: 1.616-1.653; p < 0.001) were associated with the composite endpoint. COVID-19 was associated with the composite endpoint outcome in the year 2020 (OR: 1.147; 95% CI: 1.037-1.265; p = 0.007). Conclusions: Hospitalization for AF/AFL dropped significantly during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, possibly due to patients' avoidance of hospital visits. The composite endpoint of Mortality/ACS/Stroke uptrended significantly during the study period. COVID-19 was shown to be independently associated with the adverse composite outcome Mortality/ACS/Stroke.

Lower heart rates and beta-blockers are associated with new-onset atrial fibrillation.

Background: Lower heart rates (HRs) prolong diastole, which increases filling pressures and wall stress. As a result, lower HRs may be associated with higher brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels and incident atrial fibrillation (AF). Beta-blockers may increase the risk for AF due to suppression of resting HRs. Objective: Examine the relationships of HR, BNP, beta-blockers and new-onset AF in the REVEAL-AF and SPRINT cohort of subjects at risk for developing AF. Methods: In REVEAL-AF, 383 subjects without a history of AF and a mean CHA2DS2VASC score of 4.4 ± 1.3 received an insertable cardiac monitor and were followed up to 30 months. In SPRINT, 7595 patients without prior history of AF and a mean CHA2DS2VASC score of 2.3 ± 1.2 were followed up to 60 months. Results: The median daytime HR in the REVEAL-AF cohort was 75bpm [IQR 68-83]. Subjects with below-median HRs had 2.4-fold higher BNP levels compared to subjects with above-median HRs (median BNP [IQR]: 62 pg/dl [37-112] vs. 26 pg/dl [13-53], p < 0.001). HRs <75bpm were associated with a higher incidence of AF: 37% vs. 27%, p < 0.05. This was validated in the SPRINT cohort after adjusting for AF risk factors. Both a HR < 75bpm and beta-blocker use were associated with a higher rate of AF: 1.9 vs 0.7% (p < 0.001) and 2.5% vs. 0.6% (p < 0.001), respectively. The hazard ratio for patients on beta-blockers to develop AF was 3.72 [CI 2.32, 5.96], p < 0.001. Conclusions: Lower HRs are associated with higher BNP levels and incident AF, mimicking the hemodynamic effects of diastolic dysfunction. Suppression of resting HR by beta-blockers could explain their association with incident AF.

Beta-Blocker Use and Heart Failure Outcomes in Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Although studies consistently show that beta-blockers reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), data are inconsistent in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and suggest potential negative effects in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the association of beta-blockers with heart failure (HF) hospitalization and death in patients with HF and EF ≥40% METHODS: Beta-blocker use was assessed at first encounter in outpatients ≥65 years of age with HFmrEF and HFpEF in the U.S. PINNACLE Registry (2013-2017). The associations of beta-blockers with HF hospitalization, death, and the composite of HF hospitalization/death were assessed using propensity-score adjusted multivariable Cox regression models, including interactions of EF × beta-blocker use. RESULTS: Among 435,897 patients with HF and EF ≥40% (HFmrEF, n = 75,674; HFpEF = 360,223), 289,377 (66.4%) were using a beta-blocker at first encounter; more commonly in patients with HFmrEF vs HFpEF (77.7% vs 64.0%; P < 0.001). There were significant interactions between EF × beta-blocker use for HF hospitalization, death, and composite of HF hospitalization/death (P < 0.001 for all), with higher risk with beta-blocker use as EF increased. Beta-blockers were associated with decreased risk of HF hospitalization and death in patients with HFmrEF but a lack of survival benefit and a higher risk of HF hospitalization in patients with HFpEF, particularly when EF was >60%. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, real-world, propensity score-adjusted cohort of older outpatients with HF and EF ≥40%, beta-blocker use was associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization as EF increased, with potential benefit in patients with HFmrEF and potential risk in patients with higher EF (particularly >60%). Further studies are needed to understand the appropriateness of beta-blocker use in patients with HFpEF in the absence of compelling indications.