Comparison of Electromechanical Delay during Ventricular Tachycardia and Fibrillation under Different Conductivity Conditions Using Computational Modeling.

Electromechanical delay (EMD) is the time interval between local myocyte depolarization and the onset of myofiber shortening. Previously, researchers measured EMD during sinus rhythm and ectopic pacing in normal and heart failure conditions. However, to our knowledge, there are no reports regarding EMD during another type of rhythms or arrhythmia. The goal of this study was to quantify EMD during sinus rhythm, tachycardia, and ventricular fibrillation conditions. We hypothesized that EMD under sinus rhythm is longer due to isovolumetric contraction which is imprecise during arrhythmia. We used a realistic model of 3D electromechanical ventricles. During sinus rhythm, EMD was measured in the last cycle of cardiac systole under steady conditions. EMD under tachycardia and fibrillation conditions was measured during the entire simulation, resulting in multiple EMD values. We assessed EMD for the following 3 conduction velocities (CVs): 31 cm/s, 51 cm/s, and 69 cm/s. The average EMD during fibrillation condition was the shortest corresponding to 53.45 ms, 55.07 ms, and 50.77 ms, for the CVs of 31 cm/s, 51 cm/s, and 69 cm/s, respectively. The average EMD during tachycardia was 58.61 ms, 58.33 ms, and 52.50 ms for the three CVs. Under sinus rhythm with action potential duration restitution (APDR) slope 0.7, the average EMD was 66.35 ms, 66.41 ms, and 66.60 ms in line with the three CVs. This result supports our hypothesis that EMD under sinus rhythm is longer than that under tachyarrhythmia conditions. In conclusion, this study observed and quantified EMD under tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation conditions. This simulation study has widened our understanding of EMD in 3D ventricles under chaotic conditions.

Computational Prediction of the Combined Effect of CRT and LVAD on Cardiac Electromechanical Delay in LBBB and RBBB.

Two case reports showed that the combination of CRT and LVAD benefits the end-stage heart failure patients with prolonged QRS interval significantly. In one of the reports, the patient had the LVAD removed due to the recovery of the heart function. However, the quantification of the combined devices has yet to be conducted. This study aimed at computationally predicting the effects of CRT-only or combined with LVAD on electromechanical behaviour in the failing ventricle with left bundle branch blocked (LBBB) and right bundle branch blocked (RBBB) conditions. The subjects are normal sinus rhythm, LBBB, RBBB, LBBB with CRT-only, RBBB with CRT-only, LBBB with CRT + LVAD, and RBBB with CRT + LVAD. The results showed that the CRT-only shortened the total electrical activation time (EAT) in the LBBB and RBBB conditions by 20.2% and 17.1%, respectively. The CRT-only reduced the total mechanical activation time (MAT) and electromechanical delay (EMD) of the ventricle under LBBB by 21.3% and 10.1%, respectively. Furthermore, the CRT-only reduced the contractile adenosine triphosphate (ATP) consumption by 5%, increased left ventricular (LV) pressure by 6%, and enhanced cardiac output (CO) by 0.2 L/min under LBBB condition. However, CRT-only barely affects the ventricle under RBBB condition. Under the LBBB condition, CRT + LVAD increased LV pressure and CO by 10.5% and by 0.9 L/min, respectively. CRT + LVAD reduced ATP consumption by 15%, shortened the MAT by 23.4%, and shortened the EMD by 15.2%. In conclusion, we computationally predicted and quantified that the CRT + LVAD implementation is superior to CRT-only implementation particularly in HF with LBBB condition.