AimsThe long-term clinical value of the optimization of atrioventricular (AVD) and interventricular (VVD) delays in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) remains controversial. We studied retrospectively the association between the frequency of AVD and VVD optimization and 1-year clinical outcomes in the 199 CRT patients who completed the Clinical Evaluation on Advanced Resynchronization study.Methods and resultsFrom the 199 patients assigned to CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) (New York Heart Association, NYHA, class III/IV, left ventricular ejection fraction <35%), two groups were retrospectively composed a posteriori on the basis of the frequency of their AVD and VVD optimization: Group 1 (n = 66) was composed of patients ‘systematically’ optimized at implant, at 3 and 6 months; Group 2 (n = 133) was composed of all other patients optimized ‘non-systematically’ (less than three times) during the 1 year study. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure-related hospitalization, NYHA functional class, and Quality of Life score, at 1 year. Systematic CRT optimization was associated with a higher percentage of improved patients based on the composite endpoint (85% in Group 1 vs. 61% in Group 2, P < 0.001), with fewer deaths (3% in Group 1 vs. 14% in Group 2, P = 0.014) and fewer hospitalizations (8% in Group 1 vs. 23% in Group 2, P = 0.007), at 1 year.ConclusionThese results further suggest that AVD and VVD frequent optimization (at implant, at 3 and 6 months) is associated with improved long-term clinical response in CRT-P patients.

The purpose of this European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) prospective snapshot survey is to provide an overview of the factors influencing patient selection for the implantation of a particular type of device: subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) or transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD), across a broad range of tertiary European centres. A specially designed electronic questionnaire was sent via the internet to tertiary reference centres routinely implanting both TV-ICDs and S-ICDs. These centres were asked to prospectively include and fill-in this questionnaire for all consecutive patients implanted with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (both TV-ICD and S-ICD) during an 8-week period of time. Questions concerned standards of care and policies used for patient management, focusing particularly on the reasons for choosing one or the other type of ICD for each patient. In total 20 centres participated at the survey and entered individual data from a total of 429 consecutive patients (men 76.3%). Indication of implantation was primary prevention for 73% of the patients. Implanted devices were distributed between cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) ones with back-up defibrillators (31.6%), single-chamber TV-ICD (29.5%), S-ICD (19.8%), and dual-chamber TV-ICD (19.1%).The rate of S-ICD shows the current penetration of this treatment in everyday practice. Main reasons favouring the use of an S-ICD were young age (66.7%), anticipated (38.9%) or previous (9.3%) lead-related complications, and elevated risk (18.5%) or previous device infection (7.4%). Importantly, the choice for this device was also based on patient preference (16.7%) or active lifestyle (13%). The three most frequent reasons for the use of a transvenous device were the option of antitachycardia pacing (43.2%), and logically, the current or expected need for CRT (40%) or for permanent pacing (39.6%). This snapshot survey with individual patient data provides a contemporary insight into ICD implantation and management in the European electrophysiology tertiary centres. It also helps to better understand the reasons which condition the choice between a S-ICD and a traditional TV-ICD. Finally, it gives a picture of the distribution of various types of ICD, few years after the introduction of the S-ICD in the Europe.

No abstract

For majority of the patients with ischaemic HF and evidence of LV dyssynchrony, CABG neither eliminates dyssynchrony nor improves systolic function. Epicardial implantation of a CRT system concomitant with CABG facilitates patient management in the early postoperative period, improves LV systolic function and quality of life and is associated with low mortality at 18 months of follow-up.

AimsThe BUDAPEST-CRT Upgrade study is the first prospective, randomized, multicentre clinical trial investigating the outcomes after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) upgrade in heart failure (HF) patients with intermittent or permanent right ventricular pacing (RVP) with wide paced QRS. This report describes the baseline clinical characteristics of the enrolled patients and compares them to cohorts from previous milestone CRT studies. Methods and ResultsThis international multicentre randomized controlled trial investigates 360 patients having a pacemaker (PM) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) device for at least six months prior to enrollment, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF≤35%), HF symptoms (New York Heart Association functional class II-IVa), wide paced QRS (>150 ms), and ≥20% of RVP burden without having a native left bundle branch block.At enrollment, the mean age of the patients was 73±8 years; 89% were male, 97% of the patients were in NYHA II/III functional class, and 56% had atrial fibrillation. Enrolled patients predominantly had conventional PM devices, with a mean RVP burden of 86%.Thus, this is a patient cohort with advanced HF, low baseline LVEF (25%±7%), high Nterminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels [2231 pg/mL (25th -75th percentile 1254/4309 pg/mL)], and frequent HF hospitalizations during the preceding 12 months (50%). ConclusionWhen compared with prior CRT trial cohorts, the BUDAPEST-CRT Upgrade study includes older patients with a strong male predominance and a high burden of atrial fibrillation and other comorbidities. Moreover, this cohort represents an advanced HF population with low LVEFs, high NT-proBNPs, and frequent previous HF events.