It has been shown from meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that patients with a pre-crt QRS duration (QRSD) >150 ms benefit

Similar documents
The Role of Ventricular Electrical Delay to Predict Left Ventricular Remodeling With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Dialysis-Dependent Cardiomyopathy Patients Demonstrate Poor Survival Despite Reverse Remodeling With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Cardiac Resynchronization ICD Therapy: What is New?

Cardiac Devices CRT,ICD: Who is and is not a Candidate? Who Decides

How do I convert my CRT Non Responder into Responder?

From left bundle branch block to cardiac failure

Online Appendix (JACC )

Comparison of clinical trials evaluating cardiac resynchronization therapy in mild to moderate heart failure

This is What I do to Improve CRT Response for CRT Non-Responders

Large RCT s of CRT 2002 to present

Supplementary Online Content

Rita Calé, Miguel Mendes, António Ferreira, João Brito, Pedro Sousa, Pedro Carmo, Francisco Costa, Pedro Adragão, João Calqueiro, José Aniceto Silva.

The Role of ICD Therapy in Cardiac Resynchronization

Indications for and Prediction of Successful Responses of CRT for Patients with Heart Failure

Effect of Ventricular Pacing on Myocardial Function. Inha University Hospital Sung-Hee Shin

New Strategies For Treating Patients With Chronic Heart Failure

All in the Past? Win K. Shen, MD Mayo Clinic Arizona Controversies and Advances in CV Diseases Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, MFMER

Device Based Therapy for the Failing Heart: ICD and Cardiac Resynchronization Rx

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (biventricular pacing) for the treatment of heart failure

Impact of QRS duration and morphology on CRT effectiveness

Supplementary Online Content

Cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure: state of the art

Biomarkers and Arrhythmias/Devices Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green, M.D.

BENEFIT OF CRT IN MILDLY SYMPTOMATIC HEART FAILURE RECENT DATA FROM MADIT-CRT AND RAFT

Brian Olshansky, MD, FHRS,* John D. Day, MD, FHRS, Renee M. Sullivan, MD,* Patrick Yong, MSEE, Elizabeth Galle, MS, Jonathan S. Steinberg, MD, FHRS

ESC Guidelines. ESC Guidelines Update For internal training purpose. European Heart Journal, doi: /eurheart/ehn309

Effects of heart rate reduction with ivabradine on left ventricular remodeling and function:

A Square Peg in a Round Hole: CRT IN PAEDIATRICS AND CONGENITAL HEART DISEASE

Arthur J. Moss, MD Professor of Medicine/Cardiology University of Rochester Medical Center Rochester, NY. DISCLOSURE INFORMATION Arthur J.

Evaluation of Sum Absolute QRST Integral as a Clinical Marker for Ventricular Arrhythmias. Markus Kowalsky Group 11

DISCLOSURES ACHIEVING SUCCESS THROUGH FAILURE: UPDATE ON HEART FAILURE WITH PRESERVED EJECTION FRACTION NONE

Do All Patients With An ICD Indication Need A BiV Pacing Device?

Gender and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Chairs: David Heaven & Belinda Green. Gender and Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy

Response of Right Ventricular Size to Treatment with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and the Risk of Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias in MADIT-CRT

Association of apical rocking with super-response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy

Electrocardiography for Healthcare Professionals

Arbolishvili GN, Mareev VY Institute of Clinical Cardiology, Moscow, Russia

Name of Policy: Bi-Ventricular Pacemakers (Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) for the Treatment of Heart Failure

CRT Vs RV Pacing Benefits

Congestive Heart Failure or Heart Failure

Effects of heart rate reduction with ivabradine on left ventricular remodeling and function:

Arrhythmias and Heart Failure Dr Chris Lang Consultant Cardiologist and Electrophysiologist Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh

Therapeutic Targets and Interventions

Chapter 4: Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With CKD

HF and CRT: CRT-P versus CRT-D

Heart Failure with Preserved EF (HFPEF) Epidemiology and management

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Heart Failure

Implantation of a CRT-Pacemaker Rather than CRT-Defibrillator is Usually Preferred

Evidence of Baroreflex Activation Therapy s Mechanism of Action

Efficacy of beta-blockers in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation: An individual patient data meta-analysis

Recurrent Implantable Defibrillator Discharges (ICD) Discharges ICD Storm

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE

LEFT BUNDLE BRANCH BLOCK- BENIGN OR A HARBINGER OF HEART FAILURE? PROGNOSTIC INDICATOR?

Need to Know: Implantable Devices. Carolyn Brown RN, MN, CCRN Education Coordinator Emory Healthcare Atlanta, Georgia

Bi-Ventricular pacing after the most recent studies

NCAP NATIONAL CARDIAC AUDIT PROGR AMME NATIONAL HEART FAILURE AUDIT 2016/17 SUMMARY REPORT

BSH Annual Autumn Meeting 2017

Resynchronization/Defibrillation

CRT-D or CRT-P: HOW TO CHOOSE THE RIGHT PATIENT?

Provocative Cases: Issues in the Expanding Use of CRT in Treating CHF Patients

8/8/2011. CARDIAC RESYCHRONIZATION THERAPY for Heart Failure. Case Presentation. Case Presentation

Biomarkers and Arrhythmias/Devices Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green, MD, FHRS

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy

Ενδείξεις αμφικοιλιακής βηματοδότησης. Ποιοι ασθενείς με καρδιακή ανεπάρκεια πρέπει να λάβουν αμφικοιλιακό απινιδωτή;

Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Evolving Revascularization Strategies

Devices and Other Non- Pharmacologic Therapy in CHF. Angel R. Leon, MD FACC Division of Cardiology Emory University School of Medicine

Randomized Trial to Optimize the Dose and Efficacy of Beta-Blocker in Systolic Heart Failure: Japanese Chronic Heart Failure (J-CHF) Study

Role of Ablation of AF and PVCs in the Management of Heart Failure

I have no disclosures. Disclosures

Biventricular Pacemakers (Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) for the Treatment of Heart Failure

Contemporary Advanced Heart Failure Therapy

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy in MADIT II Patients with Signs and Symptoms of Heart Failure

WHAT DO ELECTROPHYSIOLOGISTS WANT TO KNOW FROM ECHOCARDIOGRAPHERS BEFORE, DURING&AFTER CARDIAC RESYNCHRONIZATION THERAPY?

How to Assess Dyssynchrony

Heart Failure Treatments

Aldosterone Antagonism in Heart Failure: Now for all Patients?

What s new in 2016 Guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology? HEART FAILURE. Marc Ferrini (Lyon Fr)

Biventricular Pacemakers (Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) for the Treatment of Heart Failure

Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) Long Term Outcomes

His Bundle Pacing: Where is it going? Kenneth A. Ellenbogen, M.D. Kontos Professor, VCU School of Medicine November 17, 2017

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Guidelines and Missing Groups

ICD Guidelines: who benefits from an ICD?

Heart Failure Overview. Dr Chris K Y Wong

Management of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure

Congestive Heart Failure: Outpatient Management

MADIT Studies: CRT in the Non-LBBB Patient and Other Findings. Arthur J. Moss, MD

State-of-the-Art Management of Chronic Systolic Heart Failure

Clinical outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy in dilated-phase hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Thoranis Chantrarat MD

The Influence of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on the Effectiveness of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

ESC Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure

Primary prevention of SCD with the ICD in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy for mild-to-moderate heart failure

CRT in the RV Paced Patient When to Upgrade?

Pattarapong Makarawate MD, FHRS Assistant Professor. Division Of Cardiology Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University

CONTAK RENEWAL CLINICAL SUMMARY

SCOMPENSO CARDIACO: IL PUNTO DELLA RICERCA

Heart Failure. Dr. William Vosik. January, 2012

Heart Failure Challenges and Unmet needs

Rate of Heart failure guideline adherence in a tertiary care center in India after accounting for the therapeutic contraindications.

Transcription:

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy may be detrimental in patients with a Very Wide QRSD > 180 ms (VWQRSD) and Right Bundle Branch Block Morphology: Analysis From the Medicare ICD Registry Varun Sundaram MD, Kenneth C. Bilchick MD, Albert L. Waldo MD, PhD (Hon), Yogesh N. V. Reddy MD, Samuel J. Asirvatham MD, Judith A. Mackall MD, Anselma Intini MD, Brigid Wilson PhD, Daniel I. Simon MD, Jayakumar Sahadevan MD. Disclosures; None

Background It has been shown from meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that patients with a pre-crt QRS duration (QRSD) >150 ms benefit more than QRSD of 120-149 ms However, the benefits in the group of patients with a very wide QRSD 180 ms (VWQRSD) has not been well studied, as these patients were under-represented in CRT trials Sipahi I et al, Am Heart J 2012;163(2):260-67 Cleland JG et al, Eur Heart J 2013;32(46):3547-56 2

Causes of wide QRS complex Conduction block (LBBB, RBBB, IVCD) Combination of both Electrical uncoupling Isolated diffuse left ventricular electrical uncoupling of the working myocardium alone produces a QRSD of 120 +/- 10ms In the presence of significant electrical uncoupling, the With true left bundle branch block (LBBB), the QRSD is in the range of 140 benefits +/- 16 ms, of and CRT with may true be right negated bundle by branch slow and block dispersed (RBBB), the QRSD is even less conduction during pacing Any further widening of the QRSD beyond 140 ms +/- 16 ms is due to a combined effect of BBB and electrical uncoupling Potse M et al. Europace 2012;14: v33 v39 Potse M et al. J Cardiovasc Transl Res 2012;5:146 58 3

Role of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) BBB like morphology? QRS < 130 ms QRS 140 ms +/- 16 ms QRS > 180 ms Electrical uncoupling True BBB Combination of both BBB and electrical uncoupling ECHO CRT trial. Frank Ruschitzka, et al, N Engl J Med 2013; 369:1395-1405

Methods Included patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% and evidence of electrical dyssynchrony, defined by a QRSD 120 ms from the Medicare ICD registry All patients included in the analysis survived at least three days after CRT-D implantation Final analysis N=14,902 patients (Received CRT-D between Jan 2005 and April 2006) Classified into 3 groups based on their QRS interval 120-149 ms 150-179 ms > 180 ms HYPOTHESIS When stratified by BBB morphology, patients with a VWQRSD ( 180 ms) had worse clinical outcomes than those with a QRSD of 150-179 ms. Follow up of 6 years Outcomes 1. Death 2. Composite of death and heart failure hospitalization (HFH)

RESULTS: Table 1 Demographics by QRS group Variable Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 QRS 120-149ms QRS 150-179ms QRS >= 180 ms P value (n=6010) (n=5983) (n=2909) Age, mean +/SD yrs 72.4±10.7 73.3±10.4 73.8±10.4 <0.0001 BBB Morphology LBBB n (%) 3,928 (65.3%) 4,383 (73.3%) 2,019 (69.4%) <0.0001 RBBB n (%) 705 (11.7%) 708 (11.8%) 218 (7.5%) <0.0001 IVCD n (%) 1,377 (22.9%) 892 (14.9%) 672 (23.1%) <0.0001 LVEF mean +/-SD % 23.4±6.3 23.1±6.3 22.5±6.3 <0.0001 SBP, mean +/- SD, mm Hg 126.7±23.2 127.0±22.1 124.8±21.1 0.002 DBP, mean +/- SD, mm Hg 70.4±15.2 70.0±12.7 70.0±12.5 0.08 Gender n (%) Male 4,316 (71.8%) 4,225 (70.6%) 2,287 (78.6%) <0.001 Female 1,694 (28.2%) 1,758 (29.4%) 622 (21.4%) <0.001 NYHA n (%) Class I 62 (1.03%) 76 (1.27%) 43 (1.48%) 0.5 Class II 667 (11.1%) 654 (10.9%) 317 (10.9%) 0.56 Class III 4,482 (74.6%) 4,426 (74.0%) 2,141 (73.6%) 0.56 Class IV 799 (13.3%) 827 (13.8%) 408 (14.0%) 0.56

RESULTS: Table 1 Demographics by QRS group Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Variable QRS 120-149ms QRS 150-179ms QRS >= 180 ms P value (n=6010) (n=5983) (n=2909) Ischemic CM, n (%) 4288 (71.4%) 4056 (67.8%) 1965 (67.6%) <0.0001 Atrial fibrillation, n (%) 1995 (33.2%) 1978 (33.1%) 1198 (41.2%) <0.0001 Ventricular Tachycardia, n (%) 1196 (19.9%) 1144 (19.1%) 582 (20.0%) 0.46 Sudden Cardiac arrest, n (%) 95 (1.58%) 91 (1.52%) 69 (2.37%) 0.009 Diabetes Mellitus, n (%) 2202 (36.6%) 2160 (36.1%) 960 (33.0%) 0.003 Medications Beta Blockers 4727 (78.7%) 4748 (79.4%) 2283 (78.5%) 0.53 ACEI/ARB 4452 (74.1%) 4463 (74.6%) 2150 (73.9%) 0.72 Diuretic 4686 (78.0%) 4686 (78.3%) 2351 (80.8%) 0.006 Amiodarone 694 (11.6%) 789 (13.2%) 540 (18.6%) <0.0001 Digoxin 2391 (39.8%) 2472 (41.3%) 1349 (46.4%) <0.0001 Coumadin 1811 (30.1%) 1811 (30.3%) 1119 (38.5%) <0.0001

Table 2 : Multivariable HRs for Early/Intermediate Time Points -- Death Outcome Adjusted HR for Mortality at 1 yr (95% CI) P value Adjusted HR for Mortality at 3 yrs (95%CI) P value Age (per year) 1.018 (1.012-1.023) <0.0001 1.019 (1.015-1.022) <0.0001 Female Gender 0.89 (0.80-0.99) 0.048 0.85 (0.80-0.92) <0.0001 QRS 150-179 ms LBBB (REF) 1.00 N/A 1.00 N/A RBBB 1.48 (1.20-1.82) 0.0002 1.37 (1.20-1.57) <0.0001 IVCD 1.30 (1.07-1.58) 0.01 1.22 (1.08-1.38) 0.002 QRS 120-149 ms LBBB 1.33 (1.17-1.51) <0.0001 1.19 (1.10-1.29) <0.0001 RBBB 1.65 (1.34-2.03) <0.0001 1.54 (1.36-1.76) <0.0001 IVCD 1.53 (1.29-1.80) <0.0001 1.28 (1.15-1.43) <0.0001 QRS >=180 ms LBBB 0.88 (0.75-1.04) 0.14 1.02 (0.93-1.13) 0.63 RBBB 1.74 (1.28-2.38) 0.0005 1.72 (1.40-2.10) <0.0001 IVCD 1.01 (0.80-1.28) 0.92 0.97 (0.84-1.13) <0.0001

Table 2 : Multivariable HRs for Early/Intermediate Time Points -- Death Outcome Adjusted HR for Mortality at 1 yr (95% CI) P value Adjusted HR for Mortality at 3 yrs (95% CI) P value Ischemic CM 1.31 (1.12-1.36) <0.0001 1.39 (1.29-1.49) <0.0001 Atrial Fibrillation 1.24 (1.19-1.43) <0.0001 1.21 (1.13-1.28) <0.0001 Diabetes Mellitus 1.36 (1.24-1.49) <0.0001 1.31 (1.23-1.39) <0.0001 Ventricular Tachycardia 1.13(1.01-1.25) 00-Jan-00 1.12 (1.04-1.20) 0.002 NYHA Class (REF=II) Class III 1.46 (1.22-1.76) <0.0001 1.26 (1.14-1.40) <0.0001 Class IV 2.64 (2.16-3.22) <0.0001 1.95 (1.73-2.19) <0.0001 LVEF (per 0.01) 0.973 (0.966-0.980) <0.0001 0.981 (0.976-0.985) <0.0001 Systolic BP (per mm Hg) 0.991 (0.988-0.993) <0.0001 0.994 (0.992-0.996) <0.0001 Diastolic BP (per mm Hg) 0.995 (0.991-0.999) 00-Jan-00 0.995 (0.992-0.998) 0.0003 Beta Blockers 0.89 (0.80-0.99) 00-Jan-00 0.87 (0.82-0.94) <0.0001 ACEI/ARB 0.65 (0.59-0.71) <0.0001 0.72 (0.68-0.77) <0.0001 Diuretic 1.13 (1.00-1.27) 00-Jan-00 1.22 (1.13-1.31) <0.0001 Amiodarone 1.34 (1.19-1.51) <0.0001 1.13 (1.04-1.22) <0.0001 9

Table 3: Multivariable HRs for Early/Intermediate Time Points Death/HF hospitalization Outcome Adjusted HR for Death/HF at 1 Year (95% CI) P value Adjusted HR for Death/HF at 3 Years (95% CI) P value Age (per year) 1.004 (1.001-1.007) 0.02 1.008 (1.005-1.010) <0.0001 Female Gender 1.04 (0.97-1.13) 0.26 0.97 (0.92-1.02) 0.26 QRS 150-179 ms LBBB (REF) 1.00 N/A 1.00 N/A RBBB 1.40 (1.21-1.62) <0.0001 1.30 (1.17-1.45) <0.0001 IVCD 1.10 (0.95-1.27) 0.26 1.09 (0.98-1.21) 0.1 QRS 120-149 ms LBBB 1.31 (1.20-1.42) <0.0001 1.22 (1.15-1.30) <0.0001 RBBB 1.43 (1.23-1.66) <0.0001 1.44 (1.29-1.61) <0.0001 IVCD 1.39 (1.24-1.56) <0.0001 1.29 (1.19-1.41) <0.0001 QRS >=180 ms LBBB 0.88 (0.79-0.98) 0.025 0.98 (0.91-1.06) 0.67 RBBB 1.68 (1.34-2.10) <0.0001 1.60 (1.35-1.90) <0.0001 IVCD 1.02 (0.86-1.20) 0.67 1.02 (0.91-1.15) 0.76

Figure1: Adjusted hazard ratios/95% confidence intervals for death at 6 years in a Cox Proportional Hazard model

Figure 2 (A, B, C): Kaplan Meyer 6 year survival plots for freedom from death (within each BBB group) Figure 2A: LBBB Figure 2B: RBBB Figure 2C: IVCD Freedom from death A (LBBB); 3 groups, p<0.0001 for QRS 120-149 ms v QRS 150-179ms, p=0.0009 for QRS 120-149 ms v QRS> 180 ms, p<0.0003 for QRS 150-179ms v QRS> 180 ms, overall log-rank p < 0.0001 Time (yrs) B (RBBB); 3 groups, p=0.04 for QRS> 180 ms vs QRS 150-179ms, overall log-rank p = 0.07 C (IVCD); 3 groups, overall log-rank p =0.49

Figure 3 (A, B, C): Kaplan Meyer 6 year survival plots for freedom from death/hfh (within each BBB group) Figure 3A: LBBB Figure 3B: RBBB Figure 3C: IVCD Freedom from death / HFH p<0.0001 for QRS 120-149 ms v QRS 150-179ms, p<0.0001 for QRS 120-149 ms v QRS> 180 ms, p=0.0003 for QRS 150-179ms v QRS> 180 ms, overall log-rank p < 0.0001 Time (yrs) p=0.10 for QRS> 180 ms v QRS 150-179ms, overall log-rank p = 0.15 p=0.08 for QRS 120-149 ms v QRS 150-179ms, p=0.03 for QRS 120-149 ms v QRS> 180 ms, overall log-rank p =0.08

Major findings In patients with RBBB, clinical outcomes with VWQRSD ( 180 ms) were worse when compared to a QRSD of 120-149 ms and a QRSD of 150-179 ms. There appears to be an incremental risk within this group that increases with patients in the higher end of this range (QRSD > 210-249 ms). In patients with LBBB, clinical outcomes with VWQRSD ( 180 ms) were similar when compared to LBBB patients with QRSD of 150-179 ms. 14

Limitations The Medicare ICD registry had a wide range of patient information, but certain important patient characteristics, such as biomarkers and right ventricular function, were missing No follow up ECGs or echocardiograms which are markers of the remodeling effects of CRT implantation 15

In Conclusion 1 2 3 VWQRSD prior to CRT implantation has complex long-term effects on prognosis after resynchronization, with a dependency on BBB morphology. In patients with RBBB, a VWQRSD is possibly a marker of advanced electrical remodeling and suggests that CRT may be ineffective in restoring synchronous contraction. Outcomes were worst for the narrower QRSD group in LBBB, and the VWQRSD group in RBBB. 16

Thank you Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland 17