Predictors of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy detection and outcomes demonstration after conduction system pacing upgrade on patients with long-term persistent atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the predictors of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) and illustrate the safety and feasibility of conduction system pacing (CSP) upgrade on patients with long-term persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: All patients with long-term persistent AF and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥50% were consecutively enrolled from January 2008 to December 2017, and all the patients with atrioventricular block (AVB) and high right ventricular pacing (RVP) percentage of at least 40%. The predictors of PICM were identified, and patients with PICM were followed up for at least 1 year regardless of CSP upgrade. Cardiac performances and lead outcomes were investigated in all patients before and after CSP upgrade. RESULTS: The present study included 139 patients, out of which 37 (26.62%) developed PICM, resulting in a significant decrease in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from 56.11 ± 2.56% to 38.10 ± 5.81% (p< .01). The median duration for the development of PICM was 5.43 years. Lower LVEF (≤52.50%), longer paced QRS duration (≥175 ms), and higher RVP percentage (≥96.80%) were identified as independent predictors of PICM. Furthermore, the morbidity of PICM progressively increased with an increased number of predictors. The paced QRS duration (183.90 ± 22.34 ms vs. 136.57 ± 20.71 ms, p < .01), LVEF (39.35 ± 2.71% vs. 47.50 ± 7.43%, p < .01), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (55.53 ± 5.67 mm vs. 53.20 ± 5.78 mm, p = .03) improved significantly on patients accepting CSP upgrade. CSP responses and complete reverse remodeling (LVEF ≥50% and LVEDD < 50 mm) were detected in 80.95% (17/21) and 42.9% (9/21) of patients. The pacing threshold (1.52 ± 0.78 V/0.4 ms vs. 1.27 ± 0.59 V/0.4 ms, p = .16) was stable after follow-up. CONCLUSION: PICM is very common in patients with long-term persistent AF, and CSP upgrade was favorable for better cardiac performance in this patient population.

Conduction system pacing improves the outcomes on patients with high percentage of ventricular pacing and heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction.

Aims: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of CSP in patients with a high percentage of ventricular pacing and heart failure with HFmrEF. Methods: Patients who underwent CSP for HFmrEF and ventricular pacing >40% were consecutively enrolled from January 2018 to May 2021. All participants were followed up at least 12 months. Clinical data including cardiac performance and lead outcomes were compared before and after the procedure. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was measured using the biplane Simpson's method. HFmrEF was defined as heart failure with the LVEF ranging from 41%-49%. Results: CSP was successfully performed in 64 cases (96.97%), which included 16 cases of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and 48 cases of His bundle pacing (HBP). After a mean of 23.12 ± 8.17 months follow-up, NYHA classification (P < 0.001), LVEF (42.45 ± 1.84% vs. 49.97 ± 3.57%, P < 0.001) and left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (55.59 ± 6.17 mm vs. 51.66 ± 3.48 mm, P < 0.001) improved significantly. During follow-up, more than half (39/64,60.9%) of patients returned to normal LVEF and LVEDD with complete reverse remodeling. The pacing threshold in LBBP was lower (0.90 ± 0.27 V@0.4 ms vs. 1.61 ± 0.71 V@0.4 ms, P < 0.001) than that in HBP. No perforation, electrode dislodging, thrombosis or infection was observed during follow-up. Conclusions: CSP could improve the clinical outcomes in patients with HFmrEF and a high percentage of ventricular pacing. LBBP might be a better choice because of its feasibility and safety, especially in patients with infranodal atrioventricular block.

Optimal Catheter Ablation Strategy for Patients with Persistent Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure: A Retrospective Study.

The optimal catheter ablation (CA) strategy for patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) and heart failure (HF) remains uncertain. Between 2016 and 2020, 118 consecutive patients with PeAF and HF who underwent the CA procedure in two centers were retrospectively evaluated and divided into the pulmonary vein isolation (PVI)-only and PVI + additional ablation groups. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) was performed at baseline, one month, and 12 months after the CA procedure. The HF symptoms and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvements were analyzed. Fifty-six patients underwent PVI only, and 62 patients received PVI with additional ablation. Compared with the baseline, a significant improvement in the LVEF and left atrial diameter postablation was observed in all patients. No significant HF improvement was detected in the PVI + additional ablation group than in the PVI-only group (74.2% vs. 71.4%, P = 0.736), but the procedure and ablation time were significantly longer (137.4 ± 7.5 vs. 123.1 ± 11.5 min, P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in the change in TTE parameters and the number of rehospitalizations. For patients with PeAF and HF, CA appears to improve left ventricular function. Additional ablation does not improve outcomes and has a significantly longer procedure time. Trial registration number is as follows: ChiCTR2100053745 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; https://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx).

Appropriate intraprocedural initial heparin dosing in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation receiving uninterrupted non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatment.

BACKGROUND: To clarify the appropriate initial dosage of heparin during radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving uninterrupted nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) treatment. METHODS: A total of 187 consecutive AF patients who underwent their first RFCA in our center were included. In the warfarin group (WG), an initial heparin dose of 100 U/kg was administered (control group: n = 38). The patients who were on NOACs were randomly divided into 3 NOAC groups (NG: n = 149), NG110, NG120, and NG130, and were administered initial heparin doses of 110 U/kg, 120 U/kg, and 130 U/kg, respectively. During RFCA, the activated clotting time (ACT) was measured every 15 min, and the target ACT was maintained at 250-350 s by intermittent heparin infusion. The baseline ACT and ACTs at each 15-min interval, the average percentage of measurements at the target ACT, and the incidence of periprocedural bleeding and thromboembolic complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in sex, age, weight, or baseline ACT among the four groups. The 15 min-ACT, 30 min-ACT, and 45 min-ACT were significantly longer in the WG than in NG110 and NG120. However, no significant difference in 60 min-ACT or 75 min-ACT was detected. The average percentages of measurements at the target ACT in NG120 (82.2 ± 23.6%) and NG130 (84.8 ± 23.7%) were remarkably higher than those in the WG (63.4 ± 36.2%, p = 0.007, 0.003, respectively). These differences were independent of the type of NOAC. The proportion of ACTs in 300-350 s in NG130 was higher than in WG (32.4 ± 31.8 vs. 34.7 ± 30.6, p = 0.735). Severe periprocedural thromboembolic and bleeding complications were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with AF receiving uninterrupted NOAC treatment who underwent RFCA, an initial heparin dosage of 120 U/kg or 130 U/kg can provide an adequate intraprocedural anticoagulant effect, and 130 U/kg allowed ACT to reach the target earlier. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: ChiCTR1800016491, First Registration Date: 04/06/2018 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx ).