Del-Carpio Munoz, Freddy

AbstractProviders should be aware of the possibility of cardiac resynchronization therapy‐related proarrhythmia which could be life‐threatening. His‐bundle pacing may serve as an alternative, more physiological, option in the management as it preserves the normal sequence of depolarization from the septum to the lateral wall, and from endocardium to epicardium.

AbstractBackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Our primary aim was to evaluate patient‐centered outcomes and surrogate outcomes following catheter ablation (CA) of AF among patients with HFrEF compared to standard medical therapy with or without device therapy (atrioventricular node ablation and cardiac resynchronization therapy).MethodsA systematic literature review was performed limiting our searches to randomized control trials reporting outcomes of CA compared to standard medical therapy with or without device therapy were included. Patient‐centered outcomes were relative reduction in all‐cause mortality, heart failure readmissions, and recurrence of AF. Surrogate outcomes of interest were change in ejection fraction, change in peak oxygen consumption, reduction in brain natriuretic peptide levels, change in 6‐minute walk distance, and change in Minnesota living with heart failure score.ResultsSeven randomized control trials (Patient n = 721) met our inclusion criteria. All trials used radiofrequency energy for CA of AF. CA for AF was associated with significantly lower all‐cause mortality (Risk ratio [RR] = 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.35‐0.76, P = 0.001, I2 = 0%), lower rate of heart failure readmission (RR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.46‐0.74, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%) and lower rate of AF recurrence (RR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.22‐0.50, P < 0.001, I2 = 68%) as compared to standard medical therapy. Surrogate outcomes showed a similar benefit favoring CA.Conclusion and RelevanceCatheter ablation for AF in HFrEF is associated with improvement in patient‐centered outcomes and surrogate outcomes when compared to standard medical therapy with or without device therapy.

AbstractBackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reverses left ventricular remodeling and improves left ventricular systolic function. However, little is known about whether CRT improves ventricular conduction.ObjectiveTo determine the relationship between CRT response and QRS narrowing.MethodsThe study included consecutive patients who underwent CRT with defibrillator (CRT‐D) implantation between January 2002 and December 2012 and had subsequent generator replacement (GR). At the time of GR, super‐responder was defined as those who had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 50% or more; patients who had an LVEF of 36–49% with an increase of more than 5% were considered responders, and the others were nonresponders. All patients were assessed 6 months after CRT‐D implantation and at the time of GR.ResultsOf 114 study patients, 58 (50.9%) were nonresponders, 29 (25.4%) responders, and 27 (23.7%) super‐responders. QRS narrowing at 6 months was significant in super‐responders (175.4 ± 21.4 to 159.7 ± 20.7 ms, P = 0.001) and responders (169.0 ± 21.3 to 157.7 ± 17.6 ms, P = 0.008). At time of GR, only super‐responders had further QRS narrowing (159.7 ± 20.7 to 146.3 ± 19.2 ms, P < 0.001). QRS duration change after 6 months was independently associated with super‐response (hazard ratio: 1.20 for every 5 ms QRS duration narrowing; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.38; P = 0.005), and QRS narrowing of 10 ms or more was associated with lower risk of all‐cause mortality after GR.ConclusionContinuous QRS narrowing after CRT, as an electrical marker, is associated with a super‐response to CRT. Further QRS narrowing 6 months after CRT implantation was associated with lower risk of mortality after GR.

AbstractBackgroundQRS fragmentation (fQRS) during baseline ventricular conduction, a myocardial fibrosis marker, is associated with increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias but may not manifest unless ventricular activation change is provoked. We examined the association of fQRS during right ventricular (RV) pacing with death and ventricular tachyarrhythmia in patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction undergoing electrophysiology study (EPS).Methods and resultsStudy participants had LV dysfunction (ejection fraction < 50%) undergoing EPS from January 2002 to May 2014 at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. fQRS during RV stimulation involved >2 notches on R/S waves identified in ≥2 contiguous standard electrocardiographic leads representing anterior, inferior, or lateral ventricular segments. Primary outcomes were ventricular tachyarrhythmias that were symptomatic or required intervention and total and cardiac deaths. In all, 528 patients participated (mean age, 65 years; male sex, 80%). Of them, 312 (59%) had ischemic cardiomyopathy and mean (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 33.2% (9.5%); 457 (87%) had implantable cardiac devices (implanted defibrillator, n = 380). Mean (SD) follow‐up was 3.2 (3.0) years. fQRS during RV pacing was observed in 292 patients (60%) in any ventricular segment. Patients with fQRS during RV pacing had 2.5 higher rate of ventricular tachyarrhythmia events than patients with no fQRS (hazard ratio [95% CI], 2.45 [1.5–4.2]; P < 0.01), after correcting for baseline ventricular conduction defect and QRS duration, LVEF, inducible sustained ventricular tachycardia, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and ischemic cardiomyopathy.ConclusionsRV stimulation can unmask fQRS, and it is associated with increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmia in LV dysfunction.