TY - JOUR
T1 - Non Invasive Electrocardiographic Assessment of Ventricular Activation and Remodeling Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
T2 - ECG Imaging and Response to CRT
AU - Jackson, Tom
AU - Claridge, Simon
AU - Behar, Jonathan
AU - Yao, Cheng
AU - Elliott, Mark
AU - Mehta, Vishal
AU - Gould, Justin
AU - Sidhu, Baldeep
AU - Jorge Pereira, Helder
AU - Niederer, Steven
AU - Carr-White, Gerald
AU - Rinaldi, Christopher Aldo
PY - 2021/1/11
Y1 - 2021/1/11
N2 - Background. CRT produces acute changes in electric resynchronization which can be measured non-invasively with electrocardiographic body surface mapping (ECGi). The relation between baseline acute electrophysiology metrics and their manipulation with CRT and reverse remodeling is unclear.
Objective. To test (ECGi) derived parameters of electrical activation as predictors of volumetric response to CRT.
Methods. ECGi was performed in 21 patients directly following CRT implant. Activation parameters (LVtat, VVtat, VVsync and LV dispersion of activation times) were measured at baseline and following echocardiographically optimized CRT. Remodeling response (>15% reduction LVESV) was assessed 6 months post CRT
Results. Patients were aged 68.9±12.1, 81% were male and 57% were ischemic. Baseline measures of dyssynchrony were more pronounced in LBBB vs non LBBB. ECGi demonstrated a trend of greater interventricular dyssynchrony between responders and non-responders that did not reach statistical significance.(VVsync: -45.7±22.4 vs. -25.1±29.3ms, p=0.227). Remaining activation parameters were similar between responders and non-responders (VVtat 101±22.0 vs. 98.9±23.4ms, p=0.838; LVtat 86.4±17.1 vs. 85.1±27.7ms, p=0.904; LVdisp 28.2±6.3 vs. 27.0±8.7ms, p=0.726). In volumetric responders activation parameters were significantly improved with CRT compared to non-responders: VV sync (-45.67±22.41 vs 2.33±18.87, P=0.001), VVtat (101±22.04 vs 71±14.01ms, p=0.002), LVtat (86.44±17.15 vs 67.67±11.31, p=0.006) and LVdisp (28.22±6.3 vs 21.56±4.45, p=0.008).
Conclusion Baseline ECGi activation times did not predict CRT volumetric response. Volumetric responders exhibited significant improvements in ECGi derived metrics with CRT. ECGi does not select CRT candidates but may be a useful adjunct to guide LV lead implants and to perform post implant CRT optimization.
AB - Background. CRT produces acute changes in electric resynchronization which can be measured non-invasively with electrocardiographic body surface mapping (ECGi). The relation between baseline acute electrophysiology metrics and their manipulation with CRT and reverse remodeling is unclear.
Objective. To test (ECGi) derived parameters of electrical activation as predictors of volumetric response to CRT.
Methods. ECGi was performed in 21 patients directly following CRT implant. Activation parameters (LVtat, VVtat, VVsync and LV dispersion of activation times) were measured at baseline and following echocardiographically optimized CRT. Remodeling response (>15% reduction LVESV) was assessed 6 months post CRT
Results. Patients were aged 68.9±12.1, 81% were male and 57% were ischemic. Baseline measures of dyssynchrony were more pronounced in LBBB vs non LBBB. ECGi demonstrated a trend of greater interventricular dyssynchrony between responders and non-responders that did not reach statistical significance.(VVsync: -45.7±22.4 vs. -25.1±29.3ms, p=0.227). Remaining activation parameters were similar between responders and non-responders (VVtat 101±22.0 vs. 98.9±23.4ms, p=0.838; LVtat 86.4±17.1 vs. 85.1±27.7ms, p=0.904; LVdisp 28.2±6.3 vs. 27.0±8.7ms, p=0.726). In volumetric responders activation parameters were significantly improved with CRT compared to non-responders: VV sync (-45.67±22.41 vs 2.33±18.87, P=0.001), VVtat (101±22.04 vs 71±14.01ms, p=0.002), LVtat (86.44±17.15 vs 67.67±11.31, p=0.006) and LVdisp (28.22±6.3 vs 21.56±4.45, p=0.008).
Conclusion Baseline ECGi activation times did not predict CRT volumetric response. Volumetric responders exhibited significant improvements in ECGi derived metrics with CRT. ECGi does not select CRT candidates but may be a useful adjunct to guide LV lead implants and to perform post implant CRT optimization.
KW - Heart Failure
KW - Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy
KW - Body surface mapping
KW - ECG imaging
KW - LV activation mapping
U2 - 10.1016/j.hroo.2021.01.004
DO - 10.1016/j.hroo.2021.01.004
M3 - Article
JO - Heart Rhythm O2
JF - Heart Rhythm O2
ER -