Abstract
Introduction Adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) is known to have clinical benefits over conventional CRT; however, their effects on the electrical dyssynchrony have not been compared.
Methods We conducted a double-blind, randomized controlled trial in patients receiving CRT for routine clinical indications. Participants underwent cardiac computed tomography and 128-electrodes body surface mapping. We measured electrical dyssynchrony on the epicardial surface using noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging (ECGI) before and 6 months post-CRT. Ventricular electrical uncoupling (VEU) was calculated as the difference between the mean left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) activation times. An electrical dyssynchrony index (EDI) was computed as the standard deviation of local epicardial activation times.
Results We randomized 27 participants (mean age 64±12 y; 34% female; 53% ischemic cardiomyopathy; LV ejection fraction 28±8%; QRS duration 155±21 ms; strict left bundle branch block (LBBB) in 13%). In atypical LBBB (n=11;41%) with S-waves in V5-V6, conduction block occurred in the anterior RV, as opposed to the interventricular groove in those who met the strict LBBB criteria. As compared to baseline, VEU reduced post-CRT in aCRT (median reduction 18.9(interquartile range 4.3-29.2 ms; P=0.034), but not in conventional CRT (21.4(−30.0 to 49.9 ms; P=0.525) group. There were no differences in the degree of change in VEU and EDI indices between treatment groups.
Conclusion The effect of aCRT and conventional CRT on electrical dyssynchrony is largely similar. Further studies are needed to investigate if atypical LBBB with prominent S wave in V5-V6 responds to His bundle pacing.
Competing Interest Statement
The study was funded by Medtronic, Inc, as a physician-initiated study (LGT).
Clinical Trial
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02543281
Funding Statement
The study was funded by Medtronic, Inc, as a physician-initiated study (LGT).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) Institutional Review Board (IRB), and it was monitored by the Data and Safety Monitoring Board. All study participants signed written informed consent before entering the study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data can be made available to other investigators after confirmation of appropriate IRB oversight of the proposed additional analyses.
