Extraction of lumenless pacing leads from the His bundle and left bundle branch area: outcomes of the high-volume centre.

AIMS: The application of conduction system pacing (CSP) in clinical practice is growing, and the need for lead extraction will also increase. The data on outcomes and safety of CSP lead extraction are limited. The aim of this study was to assess procedural outcomes and safety of CSP lead removal. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-seven patients from the EXTRACT Registry with the indication for CSP lead removal were enrolled in the study conducted at the Department of Electrocardiology in Katowice, Poland. Extraction technique, outcomes, safety, and complication were evaluated. Forty-three (91.5%) leads were successfully removed, and 41 (87.2%) were removed with traction only. The dwelling time of 28 extracted leads was longer than 1 year, and the oldest extracted lead was implanted for 89 months. Seven (14.9%) leads were removed from the left bundle branch (LBB) area and 36 from the His bundle (HB). Transient complete atrioventricular block occurred during the procedure in two patients. In 27 out of 31 attempts (87.1%), new CSP leads were implanted: nine (33.3%) HB pacing leads and 18 (66.7%) LBB area pacing leads. CONCLUSION: The CSP lead extraction is safe and feasible with a low complication rate and high rate of CSP lead reimplantation.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR)-A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective trials on behalf of the STOPSTORM.eu consortium.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) is a noninvasive treatment of refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). In this study, we aimed to systematically review prospective trials on STAR and pool harmonized outcome measures in a meta-analysis. After registration in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42023439666), we searched OVID Medline, OVID Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar on November 9, 2023, to identify reports describing results of prospective trials evaluating STAR for VT. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Meta-analysis was performed using generalized linear mixed models. We identified 10 prospective trials in which 82 patients were treated with STAR between 2016 and 2022. The 90-day rate of treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events was 0.10 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04-0.2). The proportions of patients achieving given VT burden reductions were 0.61 (95% CI 0.45-0.74) for ≥95%, 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-0.91) for ≥75%, and 0.9 (95% CI 0.77-0.96) for ≥50% in 63 evaluable patients. The 1-year overall survival rate was 0.73 (95% CI 0.61-0.83) in 81 patients, 1-year freedom from recurrence was 0.30 (95% CI 0.16-0.49) in 61 patients, and 1-year recurrence-free survival was 0.21 in 60 patients (95% CI 0.08-0.46). Limitations include methodological heterogeneity across studies and moderate to significant risk of bias. In conclusion, STAR is a promising treatment method, characterized by moderate toxicity. We observed 1-year mortality of ≈27% in this population of critically ill patients suffering from refractory VT. Most patients experience a significant reduction in VT burden; however, 1-year recurrence rates are high. STAR should still be considered an investigational approach and recommended to patients primarily within the context of prospective trials.

Stereotactic management of arrhythmia - radiosurgery in treatment of ventricular tachycardia (SMART-VT). Results of a prospective safety trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Despite its increasing popularity, there are limited prospective data on stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR). In this trial, we assessed the safety and efficacy of STAR in patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT), focusing on early treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective trial was designed for adults with VT recurrence following catheter ablation (CA) despite adequate pharmacotherapy, or contraindications to CA. A single dose of 25 Gy was delivered to the arrhythmia substrate defined on electro-anatomic mapping and cardiac-gated CT. The primary endpoint was safety, defined as two or fewer treatment-related grade ≥ 3 AEs during the first three months in 11 patients. Additional endpoints included treatment efficacy, clinical and biological markers of cardiac injury, and quality of life. RESULTS: Eleven patients with a median age of 67 years, structural heart disease, and a clinically significant recurrence of VT despite adequate pharmacotherapy and 1-4 previous CAs were enrolled between 2020/09 and 2022/10. Following the treatment, one patient developed a possibly treatment-related grade ≥ 3 AE, a grade 4 heart failure exacerbation at 87 days, which resolved after conservative treatment. There was a total 84.3% reduction in VT burden in 10 evaluable patients; however, VT recurrence was eventually observed in eight, and three patients required additional CAs. Three deaths due to unrelated causes were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: STAR appears to be safe and efficient. It is a promising treatment for selected patients; however, long-term outcomes remain to be evaluated, and controlled trials comparing STAR with standards of care are missing.

The Effects of His Bundle Pacing Compared to Classic Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy.

Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) is among the most common right ventricular pacing complications. Upgrading to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the recommended treatment option. Conduction system pacing with His bundle pacing (HBP) has the potential to restore synchronous ventricular activation and can be an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP). Patients with PICM scheduled for a system upgrade to CRT were included in the prospective cohort study. Either HBP or BVP was used for CRT. Electrocardiographic, clinical, and echocardiographic measurements were recorded at baseline and six-month follow-up. HBP was successful in 44 of 53 patients (83%). Thirty-nine patients with HBP and 22 with BVP completed a 6-month follow-up. HBP led to a higher reduction in QRS duration than BVP, 118.3 ± 14.20 ms vs. 150.5 ± 18.64 ms, p < 0.0001. The improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class by one or two was more common in patients with HBP than those with BiV (p = 0.04). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improved in BVP patients from 32.9 ± 7.93% to 43.9 ± 8.07%, p < 0.0001, and in HBP patients from 34.9 ± 6.45% to 48.6 ± 7.73%, p < 0.0001. The improvement in LVEF was more considerable in HBP patients than in BVP patients, p = 0.019. The improvement in clinical outcomes and left ventricle reverse remodeling was more significant with HBP than BVP. HBP can be a valid alternative to BVP for upgrade procedures in PICM patients.

The usefulness of His bundle pacing in a heterogeneous population of patients with impaired left ventricular systolic function.

BACKGROUND: His bundle pacing (HBP) maintains a physiological activation pattern of ventricular activation, and in patients with intraventricular conduction delay (IVCD) it can normalize wide QRS duration. METHODS: A total of 181 patients from the HBP registry were enrolled into a the study, which was conducted at the Department of Electrocardiology in Katowice, Poland. The patients had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% and were implanted between November 2015 and April 2019. The HBP indications were as follows: 1) bradycardia and atrioventricular conduction disturbances with expected high pacing burden, 2) IVCD, LVEF ≤ 35%, with an indication for resynchronization therapy, 3) the need to upgrade to resynchronization therapy due to pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. Pacing parameters and echocardiographic and clinical data were assessed for up to 2 years of follow-up (FU). RESULTS: His bundle pacing was successful in 154 (85.1%) patients. Eighty-two patients completed a 6-month FU. The mean age was 70.6 ± 9.23 years, and 79% were males. At 6 months FU LVEF improved from 35.3 ± 8.22% to 43.1 ± 10.14% (p < 0.0001), and indexed left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESVi) decreased from 63.1 ± 25.21 mL/m² to 51.9 ± 22.79 mL/m² (p < 0.0001). In 53.1%, the LVESVi reduction was greater than 15%. The improvement in LVEF and LVESVi was also observed after 24 months of FU. CONCLUSIONS: His bundle pacing in permanently paced patients when LVEF is reduced below 50% is associated with improvement in LVEF and reverse left ventricle remodeling.

Histopathological Examination of an Explanted Heart in a Long-Term Responder to Cardiac Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (STereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation).

Cardiac stereotactic body radiotherapy is an emerging treatment method for recurrent ventricular tachycardia refractory to invasive treatment methods. The single-fraction delivery of 25 Gy was assumed to produce fibrosis, similar to a post-radiofrequency ablation scar. However, the dynamics of clinical response and recent preclinical findings suggest a possible different mechanism. The data on histopathological presentation of post-radiotherapy hearts is scarce, and the authors provide significantly different conclusions. In this article, we present unique data on histopathological examination of a heart explanted from a patient who had a persistent anti-arrhythmic response that lasted almost a year, until a heart failure exacerbation caused a necessity of a heart transplant. Despite a complete treatment response, there was no homogenous transmural fibrosis in the irradiated region, and the overall presentation of the heart was similar to other transplanted hearts of patients with advanced heart failure. In conclusion, our findings support the theorem of functional changes as a source of the anti-arrhythmic mechanism of radiotherapy and show that durable treatment response can be achieved in absence of transmural fibrosis of the irradiated myocardium.

Radiosurgery in Treatment of Ventricular Tachycardia - Initial Experience Within the Polish SMART-VT Trial.

Background: Stereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation (STAR) is an emerging treatment modality for patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) and refractory to treatment with drugs and radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFA). It is believed that up to 12-17% of patients experience recurrence of VT within 1 year of follow-up; thus, novel therapeutic options are needed. The aim of this article is to present initial experience within a novel treatment modality for VT. Case Summary: Two patients with a medical history of coronary artery disease and heart failure with reduced left ventricle (LV) ejection fraction, after implantation of cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and previous unsuccessful RFAs owing to sustained VT were admitted to the cardiology department due to recurrence of sustained VT episodes. With electroanatomical mapping (EAM), the VT substrate in LV has been confirmed and specified. In order to determine the target volume for radioablation, contrast-enhanced computed tomography was performed and the arrhythmia substrate was contoured using EAM data. Using the Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy technique and three 6 MeV flattening filter-free photon beam fields, a single dose of 25 Gy was delivered to the target volume structure located in the apex and anterior apical segments of LV in the first patient and in the apex, anterolateral and inferior apical segments of the second patient. In both cases, volumes of the target structures were comparable. Interrogation of the implanted ICD at follow-up visits throughout 6 months after the treatment revealed no VT episodes in the first patient and sudden periprocedural increase in VT burden with a subsequent gradual decrease of ventricular arrhythmia to only two non-sustained episodes at the end of the follow-up period in case of the second patient. A significant reduction in premature ventricular contractions burden was observed compared to the pre-treatment period. No noticeable deterioration in LV function was noted, nor any adverse effects of radiosurgery associated with the implanted device. Conclusion: The early response to STAR can be unpredictable and probably does not reflect the final outcome of irradiation. Close monitoring of patients, especially in the early period after irradiation is crucial to properly handle potentially harmful early reactions to STAR.