Key result
His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) acutely reduced left ventricular activation time by 21% (-17 ms; 95% CI -25 to -9; P<0.001) compared to His bundle pacing.
Why the study?
HBP does not correct bundle branch block in all patients, prompting evaluation of combining it with fusion pacing as HOT-CRT to maximize electrical resynchronization.
Does His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) reduce left ventricular activation time compared to His bundle pacing, biventricular pacing, and multipoint pacing in patients with a standard indication for CRT?
Does His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) reduce left ventricular activation time compared to His bundle pacing, biventricular pacing, and multipoint pacing in patients with a standard indication for CRT?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
HOT-CRT acutely improves ventricular electrical synchrony beyond traditional biventricular pacing, multipoint pacing, and His bundle pacing alone.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) for reducing left ventricular activation time (LVAT) compared to His bundle pacing (HBP) and biventricular (BiV) pacing (including multipoint pacing [MPP]), using electrocardiographic (ECG) imaging. BACKGROUND: HBP may correct bundle branch block (BBB) and has shown encouraging results for providing CRT. However, HBP does not correct BBB in all patients and may be combined with univentricular or BiV fusion pacing to deliver HOT-CRT to maximize resynchronization. METHODS: Nineteen patients with a standard indication for CRT, implanted with HBP without correction of BBB and BiV (n = 14) or right ventricular (n = 5) leads, were prospectively enrolled. Patients underwent ECG imaging while pacing in different configurations using different LV electrodes and at different HBP ventricular pacing (VP) delays. The primary endpoint was reduction in LVAT with HOT-CRT, and the secondary endpoints included various other dys-synchrony measurements including right ventricular activation time (RVAT). RESULTS: Compared to HBP, HOT-CRT reduced LVAT by 21% (-17 ms [95% confidence interval [CI]: -25 to -9 ms]; p < 0.001) and outperformed BiV by 24% (-22 ms [95% CI: -33 to -10 ms]; p = 0.002) and MPP by 13% (-11 ms [95% CI: -21 to -1 ms]; p = 0.035). Relative to HBP, HOT-CRT also reduced RVAT by 7% (-5 ms [95% CI: -9 to -1 ms; p = 0.035) in patients with right BBB, whereas RVAT was increased by BiV. The other electrical dyssynchrony measurements also improved with HOT-CRT. CONCLUSIONS: HOT-CRT acutely improves ventricular electrical synchrony beyond BiV and MPP. The impact of this finding needs to be evaluated further in studies with clinical follow-up. (Electrical Resynchronization and Acute Hemodynamic Effects of Direct His Bundle Pacing Compared to Biventricular Pacing; NCT03452462).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zweerink et al. (2021) studied Heart Failure (n=19). His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) vs. His bundle pacing (HBP), biventricular (BiV) pacing, and multipoint pacing (MPP) was evaluated on Reduction in left ventricular activation time (LVAT) (MD -17 ms, 95% CI -25 to -9, p=<0.001). His-optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy (HOT-CRT) acutely reduced left ventricular activation time by 21% (-17 ms; 95% CI -25 to -9; P<0.001) compared to His bundle pacing.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: