Relationship between sex, body size, and cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit: A patient-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Women might benefit more than men from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and do so at shorter QRS durations. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis was performed to determine whether sex-based differences in CRT effects are better accounted for by height, body surface area (BSA), or left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD). METHODS: We analyzed patient-level data from CRT trials (MIRACLE, MIRACLE ICD, MIRACLE ICD II, REVERSE, RAFT, COMPANION, and MADIT-CRT) using bayesian hierarchical Weibull regression models. Relationships between QRS duration and CRT effects were examined overall and in sex-stratified cohorts; additional analyses indexed QRS duration by height, BSA, or LVEDD. End points were heart failure hospitalization (HFH) or death and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Compared with men (n = 5628), women (n = 1439) were shorter (1.62 [interquartile range, 1.57-1.65] m vs 1.75 [1.70-1.80] m; P < .001), with smaller BSAs (1.76 [1.62-1.90] m2 vs 2.02 [1.89-2.16] m2; P < .001). In adjusted sex-stratified analyses, the reduction in HFH or death was greater for women (hazard ratio, 0.54; credible interval, 0.42-0.70) than for men (hazard ratio, 0.77; credible interval, 0.66-0.89; Pinteraction = .009); results were similar for all-cause mortality even after adjustment for height, BSA, and LVEDD. Sex-specific differences were observed only in nonischemic cardiomyopathy. The effect of CRT on HFH or death was observed at a shorter QRS duration for women (126 ms) than for men (145 ms). Indexing QRS duration by height, BSA, or LVEDD attenuated sex-specific QRS duration thresholds for the effects of CRT on HFH or death but not on mortality. CONCLUSION: Although body size partially explains sex-specific QRS duration thresholds for CRT benefit, it is not associated with the magnitude of CRT benefit. Indexing QRS duration for body size might improve selection of patients for CRT, particularly with a "borderline" QRS duration. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT00271154, NCT00251251, NCT00267098, NCT00180271.

Benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy among older patients: A patient-level meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) and mortality for guideline-indicated patients with heart failure (HF). Most patients with HF are aged ≥70 years but such patients are often under-represented in randomized trials. METHODS: Patient-level data were combined from 8 randomized trials published 2002-2013 comparing CRT to no CRT (n = 6,369). The effect of CRT was estimated using an adjusted Bayesian survival model. Using age as a categorical (<70 vs ≥70 years) or continuous variable, the interaction between age and CRT on the composite end point of HFH or all-cause mortality or all-cause mortality alone was assessed. RESULTS: The median age was 67 years with 2436 (38%) being 70+; 1,554 (24%) were women; 2,586 (41%) had nonischemic cardiomyopathy and median QRS duration was 160 ms. Overall, CRT was associated with a delay in time to the composite end point (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.75, 95% credible interval [CI] 0.66-0.85, P = .002) and all-cause mortality alone (aHR of 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.96, P = .017). When age was treated as a categorical variable, there was no interaction between age and the effect of CRT for either end point (P > .1). When age was treated as a continuous variable, older patients appeared to obtain greater benefit with CRT for the composite end point (P for interaction = .027) with a similar but nonsignificant trend for mortality (P for interaction = .35). CONCLUSION: Reductions in HFH and mortality with CRT are as great or greater in appropriately indicated older patients. Age should not be a limiting factor for the provision of CRT.

Point-of-Care Chemistry-Guided Dialysate Adjustment to Reduce Arrhythmias: A Pilot Trial.

Introduction: Excessive dialytic potassium (K) and acid removal are risk factors for arrhythmias; however, treatment-to-treatment dialysate modification is rarely performed. We conducted a multicenter, pilot randomized study to test the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of 4 point-of-care (POC) chemistry-guided protocols to adjust dialysate K and bicarbonate (HCO3) in outpatient hemodialysis (HD) clinics. Methods: Participants received implantable cardiac loop monitors and crossed over to four 4-week periods with adjustment of dialysate K or HCO3 at each treatment according to pre-HD POC values: (i) K-removal minimization, (ii) K-removal maximization, (iii) Acidosis avoidance, and (iv) Alkalosis avoidance. The primary end point was percentage of treatments adhering to the intervention algorithm. Secondary endpoints included pre-HD K and HCO variability, adverse events, and rates of clinically significant arrhythmias (CSAs). Results: Nineteen subjects were enrolled in the study. HD staff completed POC testing and correctly adjusted the dialysate in 604 of 708 (85%) of available HD treatments. There was 1 K ≤3, 29 HCO3 <20 and 2 HCO3 >32 mEq/l and no serious adverse events related to study interventions. Although there were no significant differences between POC results and conventional laboratory measures drawn concurrently, intertreatment K and HCO3 variability was high. There were 45 CSA events; most were transient atrial fibrillation (AF), with numerically fewer events during the alkalosis avoidance period (8) and K-removal maximization period (3) compared to other intervention periods (17). There were no significant differences in CSA duration among interventions. Conclusion: Algorithm-guided K/HCO3 adjustment based on POC testing is feasible. The variability of intertreatment K and HCO3 suggests that a POC-laboratory-guided algorithm could markedly alter dialysate-serum chemistry gradients. Definitive end point-powered trials should be considered.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Colchicine for the Prevention of Recurrent Arrhythmia After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: Results of a Single-Center, Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence to suggest that colchicine reduces the risk of recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation; however, the tolerability and safety of colchicine in routine practice is unknown. METHODS: Patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF who received colchicine after ablation were matched 1:1 to patients who did not by age, sex, and renal function. Recurrent AF was compared between groups categorically at 12 months and via propensity weighted Cox proportional hazards models with and without a 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Overall, 180 patients (n = 90 colchicine and n = 90 matched controls) were followed for a median (Q1, Q3) of 10.3 (7.0, 12.0) months. Mean age was 65.3 ± 9.1 years, 33.9% were women, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.9 ± 1.5, and 51.1% had persistent AF. Most patients (70%) received colchicine 0.6 mg daily for a median of 30 days. In the colchicine group, 55 patients (61.1%) were receiving at least one known interacting medication with colchicine. After ablation, one patient required colchicine dose reduction and four patients required discontinuation. After adjusting for covariate imbalance using propensity weighting, no significant association between colchicine use and AF recurrence was identified (adjusted hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.85; p = 0.853). No significant association was found between colchicine use and all-cause hospitalizations (adjusted odds ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.28-1.96; p = 0.548). CONCLUSION: Despite the frequent presence of drug-drug interactions, a 30-day course of colchicine is well-tolerated after AF ablation; however, we did not observe any association between colchicine and lower rates of AF recurrence or hospitalization.

Association of leadless pacing with ventricular and valvular function.

BACKGROUND: Traditional transvenous pacemakers are associated with worsening tricuspid valve function due to lead-related leaflet impingement, as well as ventricular dysfunction related to electromechanical dyssynchrony from chronic right ventricular (RV) pacing. The association of leadless pacing with ventricular and valvular function has not been well established. We aimed to assess the association of leadless pacemaker placement with changes in valvular regurgitation and ventricular function. METHODS AND RESULTS: Echocardiographic features before and after leadless pacemaker implant were analyzed in consecutive patients who received a leadless pacemaker with pre- and postprocedure echocardiography at Duke University Hospital between November 2014 and November 2019. Valvular regurgitation was graded ordinally from 0 (none) to 3 (severe). Among 54 patients, the mean age was mean age was 70.1 ± 14.3 years, 24 (44%) were women, and the most frequent primary pacing indication was complete heart block in 24 (44%). The median RV pacing burden was 45.4 (interquartile range [IQR] 3.5-97.0). On echocardiogram performed 8.9 months (IQR 4.5-14.5) after implant, there was no change in the average severity of tricuspid regurgitation (mean change 0.07 ± 1.15, p = .64) from pre-procedure echocardiogram. We observed a decrease in the average left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (52.3 ± 9.3 to 47.9 ± 12.1, p = .0019) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) (1.8 ± 0.6 to 1.6 ± 0.4, p = .0437). Thirteen patients (24%) had absolute drop in LVEF of ≥10%. CONCLUSION: We did not observe short term worsening valvular function in patients with leadless pacemakers. However, consistent with the pathophysiologic impact of RV pacing, leadless pacing was associated with a reduction in biventricular function.

Comorbidities and clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: patient-level meta-analysis from eight clinical trials.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure usually have several other medical conditions that might alter the effects of interventions. We investigated whether the burden of comorbidity modified the clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Original patient-level data from eight randomized trials exploring the effects of CRT versus no CRT were pooled (BLOCK-HF, MIRACLE, MIRACLE-ICD, MIRACLE-ICD II, RAFT, COMPANION, MADIT-CRT and REVERSE). A prior history of the following comorbidities was considered: episodic or persistent atrial fibrillation (n = 920), coronary artery disease (n = 3732), diabetes (n = 2171), and hypertension (n = 3353). Patients were classified into three groups based on the number of comorbidities: 0, 1-2, or ≥3. The outcomes of interest were time to all-cause mortality and time to the composite outcome of heart failure hospitalization (HFH) or all-cause mortality. Outcomes were evaluated within each comorbidity group using a Bayesian hierarchical Weibull survival regression model. Of 6324 patients, 970 (15%) had no comorbidities, 4052 (64%) had 1-2 and 1302 (21%) had ≥3 comorbidities. The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for CRT versus no CRT for all-cause mortality in the overall cohort was 0.79 (95% credible interval [CI] 0.68-0.93) (p = 0.010); for no comorbidities the aHR was 0.54 (95% CI 0.34-0.86), for 1-2 comorbidities was 0.81 (95% CI 0.67-0.97) and for ≥3 comorbidities was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.07) (no significant interaction between CRT and comorbidity burden: p = 0.13). For the endpoint of HFH or all-cause mortality, the aHR for the overall cohort was 0.74 (95% CI 0.65-0.84) (p = 0.001), for no comorbidities was 0.69 (95% CI 0.50-0.94), for 1-2 comorbidities was 0.77 (95% CI 0.66-0.90) and for ≥3 comorbidities was 0.68 (95% CI 0.55-0.82) (no significant interaction between CRT and comorbidity burden: p = 0.081). CONCLUSION: In a meta-analysis of patient-level data from eight major trials, the totality of evidence suggests that CRT reduces HFH and/or all-cause mortality even when several comorbid diseases are present. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00271154, NCT00251251, NCT00267098, NCT00180271.

Utilization and Outcomes of Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

Background There is uncertainty about the appropriate use of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) among older patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Methods and Results Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who received a primary prevention ICD between 2010 and 2016 were identified using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Trends in ICD utilization and patient characteristics were assessed over time. Using linked Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service claims data, Cox proportional hazard models assessed factors associated with mortality and postdischarge hospitalization for cardiac arrest/ventricular arrhythmia. Of 5571 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, 1511 (27.1%) were ≥65 years old. ICD utilization increased over time in all age groups. There were no changes in the prevalence of risk factors for sudden cardiac death over time. The variables most strongly associated with postdischarge mortality were older age (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.80 [95% CI, 1.47-2.21]), New York Heart Association class (III/IV versus I/II aHR 2.17 [95% CI, 1.57-2.98]), and left ventricular ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% versus >50% aHR 2.34 [95% CI, 1.58-3.48]; left ventricular ejection fraction 36%-50% versus >50% aHR 2.98 [95% CI, 2.02-4.40]), while history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (aHR 2.38 [95% CI, 1.62-3.51]) and New York Heart Association class (III/IV versus I/II aHR 1.84 [95% CI, 1.22-2.78]) were strongly associated with hospitalization for ventricular arrhythmia/cardiac arrest. Conclusions Primary prevention ICD utilization in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy increased over time, including among those ≥65 years old. Among older patients, the strongest risk factors for hospitalization for ventricular arrhythmia/cardiac arrest following ICD implantation were history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia and New York Heart Association class.

Left ventricular lead implantation failure in an unselected nationwide cohort.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) lead implantation is often the most challenging aspect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) procedures; early studies reported implant failure rates in ∼10% of cases. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to define rates, reasons for, and factors independently associated with LV lead implant failure. METHODS: We studied patients with left bundle branch block and ejection fraction ≤ 35% who underwent planned de novo transvenous CRT implantation (2010-2016) and were reported to the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Independent predictors of LV lead implant failure were determined using logistic regression; age, sex, and variables with a univariable P value of <.15 were considered for inclusion in the model. RESULTS: Of the 111,802 patients who underwent a planned CRT procedure, 3.6% of patients (n = 3979) had LV lead implant failure. Reasons for implant failure included venous access (7.5%), coronary sinus access (64.3%), tributary vein access (13.5%), coronary sinus dissection (7.6%), unacceptable threshold (4.4%), and diaphragmatic stimulation (1.7%). Significant independent predictors of LV lead implant failure included younger age (odds ratio [OR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.1.01-1.02), female sex (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.29-1.47), black race (vs white, OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.32-1.57), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.08-1.40), QRS duration (OR 1.055 per 10 ms; 95% CI 1.038-1.072 per 10 ms), obstructive sleep apnea (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04-1.24), and implantation by a physician without specialized training (vs electrophysiology trained, OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.34-1.76). CONCLUSION: LV lead implant failure is uncommon in the current era and is most commonly due to coronary sinus access failure. Predictors of LV lead implant failure included younger age, female sex, black race, Hispanic ethnicity, increased QRS duration, sleep apnea, and absence of electrophysiology training.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with a prior history of atrial fibrillation: Insights from four major clinical trials.

AIMS: To investigate the association of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on outcomes among participants with and without a history of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: Individual-patient-data from four randomized trials investigating CRT-Defibrillators (COMPANION, MADIT-CRT, REVERSE) or CRT-Pacemakers (COMPANION, MIRACLE) were analyzed. Outcomes were time to a composite of heart failure hospitalization or all-cause mortality or to all-cause mortality alone. The association of CRT on outcomes for patients with and without a history of AF was assessed using a Bayesian-Weibull survival regression model adjusting for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Of 3964 patients included, 586 (14.8%) had a history of AF; 2245 (66%) were randomized to CRT. Overall, CRT reduced the risk of the primary composite endpoint (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69, 95% credible interval [CI]: 0.56-0.81). The effect was similar (posterior probability of no interaction = 0.26) in patients with (HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.55-1.10) and without a history of AF (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55-0.80). In these four trials, CRT did not reduce mortality overall (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66-1.01) without evidence of interaction (posterior probability of no interaction = 0.14) for patients with (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.70-1.74) or without a history of AF (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.60-0.97). CONCLUSION: The association of CRT on the composite endpoint or mortality was not statistically different for patients with or without a history of AF, but this could reflect inadequate power. Our results call for trials to confirm the benefit of CRT recipients with a history of AF.

Heart rate and death and hospitalization for heart failure in patients with persistent or permanent atrial fibrillation: Insights from the ARISTOTLE trial.

Rate control is fundamental in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The independent association of heart rate with outcomes and range of heart rate associated with best outcomes remains uncertain. We assessed the relationship between heart rate and clinical outcomes in patients with persistent or permanent AF enrolled in the randomized, double-blind ARISTOTLE trial. In patients with persistent or permanent AF, a faster heart rate is associated with a modest, but statistically significant increase in death and heart failure hospitalizations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00412984).

Atrial Fibrillation.

Evidence for diagnosis and treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) has expanded substantially since 2017, when In the Clinic last considered this subject. Direct oral anticoagulants have become the predominant therapy for thromboembolic disease, and antidotes for these drugs are now available. Device-based left atrial appendage occlusion is frequently used in patients who cannot tolerate systemic anticoagulation, and growing evidence suggests that early rhythm control improves outcomes. Catheter ablation is now frequently performed to prevent recurrent AF. Managing risk factors for AF, such as hypertension, diabetes, and obesity, remains paramount in prevention of this condition.

Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy by New York Heart Association Class: A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis.

Data on the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with severe heart failure (HF) symptoms are limited. We investigated the relative effects of CRT in patients with ambulatory NYHA IV vs. III functional class at the time of device implantation. In this meta-analysis, we pooled patient-level data from the MIRACLE, MIRACLE-ICD, and COMPANION trials. Outcomes evaluated were time to the composite endpoint of first HF hospitalization (HFH) or all-cause mortality and time to all-cause mortality alone. The association between CRT and outcomes was evaluated using a Bayesian Hierarchical Weibull survival regression model. We assessed if this association differs between NYHA III and IV groups by adding an interaction term between CRT and NYHA class as a random effect. A sensitivity analysis was performed by including data from the RAFT trial. Our pooled analysis included 2309 patients. Overall, CRT was associated with a longer time to HFH or all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.79, 95%CI 0.64 - 0.99, p = 0.044), with a similar association with time to all-cause mortality (aHR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 - 1.03, p = 0.083). Associations of CRT with outcomes were not significantly different for those in NYHA III and IV classes (ratio of aHR 0.72, 95% CI 0.30 - 1.27, p = 0.23 for HFH/mortality; ratio of aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.35 - 1.34, p = 0.27 for all-cause mortality alone). The sensitivity analysis, including RAFT data, did not show a significant relative CRT benefit between NYHA III and IV classes. Overall, there was no significant difference in the association of CRT with either outcome for patients in NYHA functional class III compared with functional class IV.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.