Biventricular pacing in chronic heart failure acutely facilitates the arterial baroreflex

Metabolic and mechanical stress in the failing heart activates the cardiac sympathetic afferent reflex (CSAR). It has been demonstrated that cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) acutely reduces MSNA in clinical responders. Mechanistically, this beneficial effect might be explained by acute deactivation of the CSAR. In addition to sympathoexcitation, CSAR inhibits the arterial baroreflex at the level of the nucleus tractus solitarii. Hence, in responders, CRT is likely to remove/reduce this inhibition. Therefore, we hypothesized that CRT acutely facilitates the arterial baroreflex. One day after implantation of a CRT device in 32 patients with chronic heart failure (LVEF; 27 +/- 6%), we measured noninvasive baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) and heart rate variability (HRV) in two conditions: CRT device switched on and switched off (on/off order randomized). BRS changes were correlated with the difference in unpaced/paced LVEF, a measure of acute mechanical response to CRT. CRT increased BRS by 35% from 2.96 to 3.79 ms/mmHg (P <0.02) and increased HRV (standard deviation of the intervals between normal beats) from 18.5 to 24.0 ms (P <0.01). The CRT-induced relative change in BRS correlated with the change in LVEF (r = 0.44; P <0.01). In conclusion, CRT acutely increases BRS and HRV. This favorable response of the autonomic nervous system might be caused by CRT-induced CSAR deactivation. Follow-up studies should verify the mechanism of the acute response and the possible predictive value of an acute positive BRS respons

Biventricular pacing-induced acute response in baroreflex sensitivity has predictive value for midterm response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

In a previous study we demonstrated that the institution of biventricular pacing in chronic heart failure (CHF) acutely facilitates the arterial baroreflex. The arterial baroreflex has important prognostic value in CHF. We hypothesized that the acute response in baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) after the institution of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has predictive value for midterm response. One day after implantation of a CRT device in 33 CHF patients (27 male/6 female; age, 66.5 +/- 9.5 yr; left ventricular ejection fraction, 28 +/- 7%) we measured noninvasive BRS and heart rate variability (HRV) in two conditions: CRT device switched on and switched off (on/off order randomized). Echocardiography was performed before implantation (baseline) and 6 mo after implantation (follow-up). CRT responders were defined as patients in whom left ventricular end-systolic volume at follow-up had decreased by > or =15%. Responders (69.7%) and nonresponders (30.3%) had similar baseline characteristics. In responders, CRT increased BRS by 30% (P = 0.03); this differed significantly (P = 0.02) from the average BRS change (-2%) in the nonresponders. CRT also increased HRV by 30% in responders (P = 0.02), but there was no significant difference found compared with the increase in HRV (8%) in the nonresponders. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the percent BRS increase had predictive value for the discrimination of responders and nonresponders (area under the curve, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.87; maximal accuracy, 0.70). Our study demonstrates that a CRT-induced acute BRS increase has predictive value for the echocardiographic response to CRT. This finding suggests that the autonomic nervous system is actively involved in CRT-related reverse remodelin

External validation of the preHEART score and comparison with current clinical risk scores for prehospital risk assessment in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS

Background: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) studies have shown that prehospital risk stratification and triage decisions in patients with suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) can be improved using clinical risk scores with point-of-care (POC) troponin. In current EMS studies, three different clinical risk scores are used in patients suspected of NSTE-ACS: the prehospital History, ECG, Age, Risk and Troponin (preHEART) score, History, ECG, Age, Risk and Troponin (HEART) score and Troponin-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (T-MACS). The preHEART score lacks external validation and there exists no prospective comparative analysis of the different risk scores within the prehospital setting. The aim of this analysis is to externally validate the preHEART score and compare the diagnostic performance of the these three clinical risk scores and POC-troponin. Methods: Prespecified analysis from a prospective, multicentre, cohort study in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS who were transported to an ED between April 2021 and December 2022 in the Netherlands. Risk stratification is performed by EMS personnel using preHEART, HEART, T-MACS and POC-troponin. The primary end point was the hospital diagnosis of NSTE-ACS. The diagnostic performance was expressed as area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV). Results: A total of 823 patients were included for external validation of the preHEART score, final hospital diagnosis of NSTE-ACS was made in 29% (n=235). The preHEART score classified 27% as low risk, with a sensitivity of 92.8% (95% CI 88.7 to 95.7) and NPV of 92.3% (95% CI 88.3 to 95.1). The preHEART classified 9% of the patients as high risk, with a specificity of 98.5% (95% CI 97.1 to 99.3) and PPV of 87.7% (95% CI 78.3 to 93.4). Data for comparing clinical risk scores and POC-troponin were available in 316 patients. No difference was found between the preHEART score and HEART score (AUROC 0.83 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.87) vs AUROC 0.80 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.85), p=0.19), and both were superior compared with T-MACS (AUROC 0.72 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.79), p≤0.001 and p=0.03, respectively) and POC-troponin measurement alone (AUROC 0.71 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.78), p<0.001 and p=0.01, respectively). Conclusion: On external validation, the preHEART demonstrates good overall diagnostic performance as a prehospital risk stratification tool. Both the preHEART and HEART scores have better overall diagnostic performance compared with T-MACS and sole POC-troponin measurement. These data support the implementation of clinical risk scores in prehospital clinical pathways

Prehospital risk assessment and direct transfer to a percutaneous coronary intervention centre in suspected acute coronary syndrome

Objective: Prehospital risk stratification and triage are currently not performed in patients suspected of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). This may lead to prolonged time to revascularisation, increased duration of hospital admission and higher healthcare costs. The preHEART score (prehospital history, ECG, age, risk factors and point-of-care troponin score) can be used by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel for prehospital risk stratification and triage decisions in patients with NSTE-ACS. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effect of prehospital risk stratification and direct transfer to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centre, based on the preHEART score, on time to final invasive diagnostics or culprit revascularisation. Methods: Prospective, multicentre, two-cohort study in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS. The first cohort is observational (standard care), while the second (interventional) cohort includes patients who are stratified for direct transfer to either a PCI or a non-PCI centre based on their preHEART score. Risk stratification and triage are performed by EMS personnel. The primary endpoint of the study is time from first medical contact until final invasive diagnostics or revascularisation. Secondary endpoints are time from first medical contact until intracoronary angiography (ICA), duration of hospital admission, number of invasive diagnostics, number of inter-hospital transfers and major adverse cardiac events at 7 and 30 days.Results: A total of 1069 patients were included. In the interventional cohort (n=577), time between final invasive diagnostics or revascularisation (42 (17-101) hours vs 20 (5-44) hours, p&amp; lt;0.001) and length of hospital admission (3 (2-5) days vs 2 (1-4) days, p=0.007) were shorter than in the observational cohort (n=492). In patients with NSTE-ACS in need for ICA or revascularisation, healthcare costs were reduced in the interventional cohort (&amp; euro;5599 (2978-9625) vs &amp; euro;4899 (2278-5947), p=0.02).Conclusion: Prehospital risk stratification and direct transfer to a PCI centre, based on the preHEART score, reduces time from first medical contact to final invasive diagnostics and revascularisation, reduces duration of hospital admission and decreases healthcare costs in patients with NSTE-ACS in need for ICA or revascularisation. Trial registration: NCT05243485. &amp; copy; Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.</p