Clinical outcomes with synchronized left ventricular pacing: analysis of the adaptive CRT trial

Heart Rhythm. 2013 Sep;10(9):1368-74. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2013.07.007. Epub 2013 Jul 11.

Abstract

Background: Acute studies have suggested that left ventricular pacing (LVP) may have benefits over biventricular pacing (BVP). The adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) algorithm provides LVP synchronized to produce fusion with the intrinsic activation when the intrinsic atrioventricular (AV) interval is normal. The randomized double-blind adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy trial demonstrated noninferiority of the aCRT algorithm compared to echocardiography-optimized BVP (control).

Objective: To examine whether synchronized LVP (sLVP) resulted in better clinical outcomes.

Methods: First, stratification by percent sLVP (%sLVP) and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the relationship between %sLVP and clinical outcomes. Second, outcomes were compared between patients in the aCRT arm (n = 318) and control patients (n = 160) stratified by intrinsic AV interval at randomization.

Results: In the aCRT arm, %sLVP ≥50% (n = 142) was independently associated with a decreased risk of death or heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.85; P = .012) compared with %sLVP <50% (n = 172). A greater proportion of patients with %sLVP ≥50% improved in Packer's clinical composite score at 6-month (82% vs. 68%; P = .002) and 12-month (80% vs. 62%; P = .0006) follow-ups compared to controls. In the subgroup with normal AV (n = 241), there was a lower risk of death or heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.52; 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.98; P = .044) with the aCRT algorithm. A greater proportion of patients in the aCRT arm improved in the clinical composite score at 6-month (81% vs. 69%; P = .041) and 12-month (77% vs. 66%; P = .076) follow-ups compared to controls.

Conclusions: Higher %sLVP was independently associated with superior clinical outcomes. In patients with normal AV conduction, the aCRT algorithm provided mostly sLVP and demonstrated better clinical outcomes compared to echocardiography-optimized BVP.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00980057.

Keywords: %sLVP; AV; AV delay; BVP; CCS; CI; CRT; Cardiac resynchronization therapy; HF; HR; LBBB; LV; LVEF; LVP; NYHA; New York Heart Association; Optimization; RV; Synchronized left ventricular pacing; VV; aCRT; adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy; atrioventricular; biventricular pacing; cardiac resynchronization therapy; clinical composite score; confidence interval; hazard ratio; heart failure; interventricular; left bundle branch block; left ventricular; left ventricular ejection fraction; left ventricular pacing; percent synchronized left ventricular pacing; right ventricular; sLVP; synchronized left ventricular pacing.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Algorithms
  • Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy / methods*
  • Double-Blind Method
  • Female
  • Heart Failure / physiopathology
  • Heart Failure / therapy*
  • Heart Ventricles
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Treatment Outcome

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT00980057