Key result
AV and VV optimization based on speckle tracking improved LVEF and NYHA class in 75% of CRT-D non-responders with non-ischemic heart failure, with no significant improvement in ischemic patients.
Why the study?
Approximately 30% of patients do not respond to CRT-D implantation, prompting investigation into cardiac strain speckle tracking to optimize CRT-D performance in non-responders.
Does AV and VV optimization based on cardiac strain speckle tracking improve LVEF and NYHA class in patients not responding to CRT-D?
RCT (n=30)
Randomized
Does AV and VV optimization based on cardiac strain speckle tracking improve LVEF and NYHA class in patients not responding to CRT-D?
Speckle tracking-based AV and VV optimization may significantly improve LVEF and NYHA class in CRT-D non-responders, particularly those with non-ischemic etiology.
May support speckle tracking optimization in non-ischemic CRT non-responders; extends personalized programming evidence from RCTs.
BACKGROUND: Approximately 30% of patients do not respond to implantation of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy - Defibrillators (CRT-D). The aim of this study was to investigate the potential for cardiac strain speckle tracking to optimize the performance of CRT-D in non-responding patients. METHODS: 30 patients not responding to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy-Defibrillators after 3 months were randomly divided into control and intervention groups. Atrioventricular interval was adjusted so that E and A waves did not overlap, the interventricular interval was subsequently optimized to yield maximum improvement of the sum of longitudinal+radial+circumferential strains. The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and NYHA improvement 3 months after optimization were evaluated and use of other strain combinations assessed. RESULTS: A significant correlation between the (combined) strain change and LVEF improvement was detected (p<0.01). 75% of patients with non-ischemic etiology of heart failure who did not respond to the original CRT-D reacted favorably with significant LVEF and NYHA improvement. The area strain was the best predictor of LVEF/NYHA improvement in those patients. No significant improvement was recorded in patients with ischemic etiology. CONCLUSIONS: AV and VV optimization based on speckle tracking is a very promising method potentially leading to a significant improvement of the outcome of CRT-D, especially in patients with non-ischemic etiology of heart failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Šipula et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in Heart failure non-responsive to CRT-D (n=30). AV and VV optimization based on speckle tracking vs. Control group was evaluated on LVEF and NYHA improvement (p=<0.01). AV and VV optimization based on speckle tracking improved LVEF and NYHA class in 75% of CRT-D non-responders with non-ischemic heart failure, with no significant improvement in ischemic patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: