A new circular mapping-guided approach for endoscopic laser balloon pulmonary vein isolation

AbstractBackgroundPulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is performed with the endoscopically assisted laser balloon ablation system (EAS). We hypothesized that placement of a circular mapping catheter (CMC) in the pulmonary vein (PV) distal to the laser balloon during ablation is feasible and safe.MethodsOut of 58 included patients, 37 underwent mapping-guided EAS PVI, with the CMC inside the PV during laser ablation, and 21 patients underwent standard EAS PVI, with the CMC outside the PV during laser ablation.ResultsMean age was 56years and 81% had paroxysmal AF. In the mapping-guided ablation group, 91% of PVs were isolated with the CMC in the PV during EAS ablation, isolation was completed in 9% of PVs after the CMC was removed from the PV. After passing a learning curve in 18 patients, a significant drop in unsuccessfully isolated PVs was observed in the mapping guided EAS PVI group (15% to 4%, P=0.020). No major complications were seen in the mapping-guided EAS PVI group. However, in the standard EAS PVI group, laser ablation was complicated by a temporary phrenic nerve palsy in 1 patient. After a median follow-up of 16.7months, there was no statistical difference in AF free survival among treatment groups (mapping-guided: 56% vs. 52%, P=0.875).ConclusionMapping guided EAS PVI with a distal CMC in the PV during laser ablation is feasible and seems safe as the standard EAS PVI approach

Impact of new X-ray technology on patient dose in pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantations

PURPOSE: New X-ray technology providing new image processing techniques may reduce radiation exposure. The aim of this study was to quantify this radiation exposure reduction for patients during pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 1185 consecutive patients who had undergone de novo pacemaker or ICD implantation during a 2-year period were included. All implantations in the first year were performed using the reference technology (Allura Xper), whereas in the second year, the new X-ray technology (AlluraClarity) was used. Radiation exposure, expressed as the dose area product (DAP), was compared between the two time periods to determine the radiation exposure reduction for pacemaker and ICD implantations without cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and with CRT. Procedure duration and contrast volume were used as measures to compare complexity and image quality. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 591 patients who had undergone an implantation using the reference technology, and 594 patients with the new X-ray technology. The two groups did not differ in age, gender, or body mass index. The DAP decreased with 69 % from 16.4 ± 18.5 to 5.2 ± 6.6 Gy cm(2) for the non-CRT implantations (p < 0.001). The DAP decreased with 75 % from 72.1 ± 60.0 to 17.8 ± 17.4 Gy cm(2) for the CRT implantations (p < 0.001). Nevertheless, procedure duration and contrast volume did not differ when using the new technology (p = 0.09 and p = 0.20, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of new X-ray technology resulted in a radiation exposure reduction of more than 69 % for patients during pacemaker and ICD implantation while image quality was unaffected

Automatic optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy using SonR-rationale and design of the clinical trial of the SonRtip lead and automatic AV-VV optimization algorithm in the paradym RF SonR CRT-D (RESPOND CRT) trial.

Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is effective in most patients with heart failure (HF) and ventricular dyssynchrony, a significant minority of patients (approximately 30%) are non-responders. Optimal atrioventricular and interventricular delays often change over time and reprogramming these intervals might increase CRT effectiveness. The SonR algorithm automatically optimizes atrioventricular and interventricular intervals each week using an accelerometer to measure change in the SonR signal, which was shown previously to correlate with hemodynamic improvement (left ventricular [LV] dP/dtmax). The RESPOND CRT trial will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the SonR optimization system in patients with HF New York Heart Association class III or ambulatory IV eligible for a CRT-D device. Enrolled patients will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either SonR CRT optimization or to a control arm employing echocardiographic optimization. All patients will be followed for at least 24 months in a double-blinded fashion. The primary effectiveness end point will be evaluated for non-inferiority, with a nested test of superiority, based on the proportion of responders (defined as alive, free from HF-related events, with improvements in New York Heart Association class or improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire quality of life score) at 12 months. The required sample size is 876 patients. The two primary safety end points are acute and chronic SonR lead-related complication rates, respectively. Secondary end points include proportion of patients free from death or HF hospitalization, proportion of patients worsened, and lead electrical performance, assessed at 12 months. The RESPOND CRT trial will also examine associated reverse remodeling at 1 year

Subcutaneous or Transvenous Defibrillator Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was designed to avoid complications related to the transvenous ICD lead by using an entirely extrathoracic placement. Evidence comparing these systems has been based primarily on observational studies. METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing were assigned to receive a subcutaneous ICD or transvenous ICD. The primary end point was the composite of device-related complications and inappropriate shocks; the noninferiority margin for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio (subcutaneous ICD vs. transvenous ICD) was 1.45. A superiority analysis was prespecified if noninferiority was established. Secondary end points included death and appropriate shocks. RESULTS: A total of 849 patients (426 in the subcutaneous ICD group and 423 in the transvenous ICD group) were included in the analyses. At a median follow-up of 49.1 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 68 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 patients in the transvenous ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence, 15.1% and 15.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.39; P = 0.01 for noninferiority; P = 0.95 for superiority). Device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 44 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.09); inappropriate shocks occurred in 41 and 29 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.89 to 2.30). Death occurred in 83 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.70); appropriate shocks occurred in 83 and 57 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.12). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing, the subcutaneous ICD was noninferior to the transvenous ICD with respect to device-related complications and inappropriate shocks. (Funded by Boston Scientific; PRAETORIAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01296022.)

Septal rebound stretch as predictor of echocardiographic response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

Aim: Septal rebound stretch (SRSsept) reflects an inefficient deformation of the septum during systole and is a potential new echocardiographic tool to predict response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT). However, there are only limited data on the potential predictive value of SRSsept on echocardiographic response. We evaluated the predictive value of SRSsept on echocardiographic response to CRT in a large population. Methods and results: A total of 138 consecutive patients with functional class II–IV heart failure who underwent CRT were studied. Echocardiography was performed at baseline and after a mean follow-up period of 22 ± 8 months. Echocardiographic response to CRT was defined as a reduction in LV end-systolic volume ≥15%. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to define the optimal cut-off value for SRSsept. Multivariable analyses were performed to adjust for potential confounders. Mean age was 68 ± 8 years (30% female). Mean baseline LV ejection fraction was 26 ± 7%, 51% had ischemic etiology. LBBB or LBBB like morphology was present in 95% of patients. Mean SRSsept was 4.4 ± 3.2%, 56% of patients had SRSsept ≥4%. Ninety six patients (70%) were echocardiographic responders. Baseline SRSsept was significantly higher in responders compared to non-responders (5.1 ± 3.2 vs 3.0 ± 2.7, P 4% independently predicted the response to CRT. Conclusions: Baseline septal rebound stretch is independently associated with echocardiographic response to CRT

On-screen image-guided lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy: Feasibility and outcome in a multicenter setting

Background: Image guidance to assist left ventricular (LV) lead placement may improve outcome after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but previous approaches and results varied greatly, and multicenter feasibility is lacking altogether. Objective: We sought to investigate the multicenter feasibility of image guidance for periprocedural assistance of LV lead placement for CRT. Methods: In 30 patients from 3 hospitals, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed within 3 months prior to CRT to identify myocardial scar and late mechanical activation (LMA). LMA was determined using radial strain, plotted over time. Segments without scar but clear LMA were classified as optimal for LV lead placement, according to an accurate 36-segment model of the whole heart. LV leads were navigated using image overlay with periprocedural fluoroscopy. After 6 months, volumetric response and super-response were defined as ≥15% or ≥30% reduction in LV end-systolic volume, respectively. Results: Periprocedural image guidance was successfully performed in all CRT patients (age 66 ± 10 years; 59% men, 62% with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, 69% with left bundle branch block). LV leads were placed as follows: within (14%), adjacent (62%), or remote (24%) from the predefined target. According to the conventional 18-segment model, a remote position occurred only once (3%). On average, 86% of patients demonstrated a volumetric response (mean LV end-systolic volume reduction 36 ± 29%), and 66% of all patients were super-responders. Conclusion: On-screen image guidance for LV lead placement in CRT was feasible in a multicenter setting. Efficacy will be further investigated in the randomized controlled ADVISE (Advanced Image Supported Lead Placement in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) trial (NCT05053568)

Dutch outcome in implantable cardioverterdefibrillator therapy: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator–related complications in a contemporary primary prevention cohort

BACKGROUND: One third of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients receive appropriate therapy, but all remain at risk of defibrillator complications. Information on these complications in contemporary cohorts is limited. This study assessed complications and their risk factors after defibrillator implantation in a Dutch nationwide prospective registry cohort and forecasts the potential reduction in complications under distinct scenarios of updated indication criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: Complications in a prospective multicenter registry cohort of 1442 primary implantable cardioverterdefibrillator implant patients were classified as major or minor. The potential for reducing complications was derived from a newly developed prediction model of appropriate therapy to identify patients with a low probability of benefitting from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. During a follow-up of 2.2 years (interquartile range, 2.0–2.6 years), 228 complications occurred in 195 patients (13.6%), with 113 patients (7.8%) experiencing at least one major complication. Most common ones were lead related (n=93) and infection (n=18). Minor complications occurred in 6.8% of patients, with lead-related (n=47) and pocket-related (n=40) complications as the most prevailing ones. A surgical reintervention or additional hospitalization was required in 53% or 61% of complications, respectively. Complications were strongly associated with device type. Application of stricter implant indication results in a comparable proportional reduction of (major) complications. CONCLUSIONS: One in 13 patients experiences at least one major implantable cardioverter-defibrillator–related complication, and many patients undergo a surgical reintervention. Complications are related to defibrillator implantations, and these should be discussed with the patient. Stricter implant indication criteria and careful selection of device type implanted may have significant clinical and financial benefits