Download to read offline
![Change in LVEF [%]
2%
9%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
P=0.04
-9.2
-28.4
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
P=0.04
Change in LV
End-systolic Volume [ml]
Improvement
Posterolateral or Lateral walls are the best with LBBB where
the septum contracts first and then the lateral wall last.
Paced at any
other LV site
Paced at most
mechanically
delayed LV site](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/cardiacresynctmh-220111164318/75/Cardiac-resynctmh-42-2048.jpg)
More Related Content
Cardiac resynctmh
- 1. Device Therapy inCongestive Heart Failure by Dr. Chetan swaroop interventional cardiologist associate director cardiology SSB Hospital , faridabad
- 2. Congestive Heart Failure 400,0005.0 million 250,000 Annual Incidence Heart Failure Prevalence Annual Mortality U.S. Up to 30 % of CHF patients have an IVCD (80% with a LBBB) which has been linked to increases in mortality and morbidity. 1-2% of the population and 6% of the population >65 Prevalence is on the rise.
- 3. Class I Asymptomatic heart failure ejectionfraction (EF) <40% Class II Mild symptomatic heart failure with ordinary exertion Class IV Symptomatic heart failure at rest Class III Moderate symptomatic heart failure with less than ordinary exertion NYHA Class-evaluates the disability imposed on the patient The FDA and the ACC/AHA Guidelines have approved biventricular pacing for class 3 and 4.
- 4. 17 8 20 15 9 19 7 6 4 42 41 39.744 11 0 10 20 30 CHF-STAT GESICA SOLVD V-HeFT I MERIT-HF CIBIS-II CARVEDILOL-US Control Group Mortality Total Mortality Sudden Death Total Mortality ~15-40%; SCD accounts for ~50% of the total deaths. 12 months 16 months 41.4 months 27 months 13 months 45 months 6 months SCD Rates in CHF Patients with LV Dysfunction
- 5. 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 60 120180 240 300 360 Days Cumulative Survival Duration (msec) <90 90 120 120 170 170 220 • QRS duration is an independent predictor of mortality (>140 ms) • Other factors are: age, creatinine, EF, and HR . - - - QRS - - - >220 SCD in Heart Failure
- 6. Degree ofSCD risk by class Mortality in NYHA class II is 5 to 15% 50 to 80% of the deaths are Sudden Mortality in NYHA class III is 20 to 50% Up to 50% of the deaths are Sudden Mortality in NYHA class IV is 30 to 70% 5 to 30% of deaths are Sudden SCD in Heart Failure
- 7. Right Ventricular Pacing RV apex pacing is harmful in patients with LV dysfunction “Paced” LBBB Abnormal LV activation Reduced stroke volume
- 8. RV pacing MADITII (2002) had a survival benefit with the ICD but in a subgroup analysis, there was an increase in heart failure morbidity (more hospitalizations) felt due to forced RV pacing compared to controls in which no pacing was present.
- 9. MADIT II: Complications Newor Worsening HF 14.9% 19.9% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% Conventional Therapy ICD Therapy (p= 0.09) N= 490 N= 742 •RV pacing causes ventricular dysynchrony and may lead to worsening HF. • Intrinsic ventricular activation is better for ICD patients with left ventricular dysfunction who do not “need” pacing. •<10% of ICD patients have a Class I pacing indication at the time of implant. •Physicians, when appropriate, should consider programming of ICDs to avoid frequent RV pacing.
- 10. ICD indicationbut no indication for a pacemaker Ef < 40% DDDR @ 70BPM versus VVI 40 BPM DAVID — Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator Trial
- 11. The Concept Inmost patients with an IVCD (QRS > 130 ms) , the presence of atrial-biventricular (RV + LV) pacing will provide early stimulation to an otherwise late segment of electrical activation in the LV. This should translate into an increase in the EF, decrease of the LV dimension, improvement in the QOL and NYHA class. This may translate into an decrease in CHF exacerbations , hospitalizations and a decrease in mortality.
- 12. The Cardiac Resynchronization Clinical Trials PATH-CHF,MUSTIC, MIRACLE, COMPANION, and CARE-HF* *This is not a complete list of all the CRT trials and the dates given are when the trial results were published.
- 13. Cumulative Enrollment inCardiac Resynchronization Randomized Trials 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Results Presented Cumulative Patients PATHCHF MUSTIC SR MUSTIC AF MIRACLE CONTAKCD MIRACLEICD PATHCHFII COMPANION MIRACLEICD II CAREHF
- 14. This wasthe first multicenter trial and used the standard endocardial RV lead and an epicardial LV lead via thoracotomy or thorascope Single blinded RCT 53 centers in Europe 41 patients PATH-CHF: 1999 Pacing Therapy for Congestive Heart Failure
- 15. Acute hemodynamic testing Randomization1:1 Best single chamber CRT Best mode No CRT 4 weeks 8 weeks One year NYHA class III-IV DCM QRS > 120 ms PR>150 No CRT Implant CRT Best single chamber 12 weeks PATH-CHF
- 16. PATH-CHF Primary endpoints Peak VO2 Six-minute walk distance Secondary endpoints Minnesota Living with Heart Failure score (QOL) NYHA class EF Trend towards decrease in Hospitalizations Acute hemodynamic testing revealed that the lateral and posterolateral walls were the best target sites. The best responders were those with QRS>150 , long PR and dP/dt < 700 mm Hg/s
- 17. MUSTIC: 2001 Multicenter Stimulationin CM European study with 67 patients QRS>150, CHF, EF <35% BiVP versus backup VVI pacing at 40 BPM Increase in 6 minute walk time , QOL and Peak VO2 with BiVP and persisted for up to 12 months 60% decrease in CHF hospitalizations First to use endocardial LV leads via the CS No significant change in mortality, but a trend towards an improvement. Acute hemodynamic studies showed the mid lateral wall to be the best site
- 18. MIRACLE:2002 Multi-center In SyncRandomized Clinical Evaluation Trial Double blinded RCT First US trial Class 3 or 4, on OPT, QRS >130 ms, EF<35% Enrollment of 453 patients
- 19. MIRACLE NYHA class III-IV LVEDD> 60 mm QRS > 130 ms Stable 3 month regimen of beta-blocker/ACE inhibitor EF < 35% Randomization CRT on CRT on 1- and 3-month follow-up 6-month follow-up CRT off 1- and 3-month follow-up 6-month follow-up Long-term follow-up
- 20. Nonresponders: older, ischemicCM, no MR, QRS<150 Responders: had shorter duration on CHF and longer QRS>155 MIRACLE 39% 34% 27% 67% 17% 16% 0% 20% 40% 60% Improved No Change Worsened Proportion Control N=225 CRT N=228 P < 0.001
- 21. MIRACLE There wasa decrease in hospitalizations of 50% at 6 months and a trend towards a decrease in mortality. All other primary and secondary endpoints were met: 6 minute walk time, peak Vo2, QOL, EF , NYHA class, LVEDD Magnitude of improvement not influenced by degree of QRS shortening with BiVP (average in all was –20msec)
- 22. FDA Approval Thefirst CRT device was approved by the FDA in September 2001 . The first CRT with an ICD was approved by the FDA in May 2002 .
- 23. MADIT 11996 required a positive EP study MUSTT 1999 required a positive EP study Madit 2 2002 prior MI (ischemic cardiomyopathy) and EF<30% (no EP study required) ;60% had CHF and 50% had QRS > 120 ms; resulted in a 31% decrease risk of death and halted prematurely due to the positive effect of the ICD: resulted in the FDA approving the ICD for primary prevention this patient population, but only those with a QRS > 120 ms. The primary ICD prevention trials
- 24. The primary ICDprevention trial SCD-Heft 2005 The SCD-Heft trial resulted in FDA approval of the ICD January 2005 in patients with CHF and EF<35 % that included both ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy for primary prevention without a positive EP study or ventricular ectopy . No QRS cutoff was required.
- 25. ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Indicationsfor Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Class II a ( Level A) Indication for Biventricular Pacing in Dilated Cardiomyopathy Biventricular pacing in medically refractory, symptomatic NYHA Class III/IV patients with idiopathic dilated or ischemic cardiomyopathy, prolonged QRS interval (130 msec), LV end diastolic diameter 55mm, and LVEF 35%
- 26. COMPANION:2004 • OPT 1 • OPT •CRT + 2 • OPT • CRT-D + 2 Randomization Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing and Defibrillation in Heart Failure
- 27. COMPANION Enrolled 1520patients class 3 and 4, QRS >120ms Primary endpoint: death or hospitalization for any cause CRT met the primary endpoints and the CRT +/- ICD significantly reduces mortality This was the first to show mortality benefit from CRT alone Showed that patients with CRT also benefit from ICD therapy OPT had SCD in 36%, 23% in CRT and 2.9% in CRT+ICD
- 28. • CRT armhad 20% reduction in mortality and hospitalization over OPT arm but it was not statistically significant • Significant reduction in CRT-ICD arm of 40% for mortality over OPT arm (19% in OPT and 11% in CRT- ICD group) • Study was halted prematurely due to its positive benefit. • Mean follow up was 16 months COMPANION
- 29. CARE-HF : March2005 The effect of cardiac resynchronization on morbidity and mortality in heart failure in 813 patients in Europe ( prospective multicenter RCT) with completed enrollment by 2002 Large patient size and length of trial (average follow up of 29 months) allowed ability to asses effects of CRT Looked at CRT alone (no ICD) Patients with class 3 or 4, EF < 35%, QRS >120 ms There was a 37% reduced mortality or first hospitalization for a cardiac cause compared to OPT
- 30. CARE-HF All endpointswere met : EF, NYHA, QOL, BNP, Echo and hemodynamic parameters 33% of the deaths in the CRT group were due to SCD For every 9 devices, one death and 3 hospitalizations were prevented Echo criteria in patients with QRS 120-149ms to look for asynchrony (had to have 2 of 3) Aortic pre-ejection delay of > 140 ms ( onset of QRS to Aortic ejection) Interventricular mechanical delay of >40 ms ( RV-LV) Delayed activation of the postero-lateral LV wall (>50ms)
- 31.
- 32. Anatomical Challenges Enlargedright atrium Abnormal CS location Presence of valves in CS Altered CS angulation Acute branch take offs Tortuous vessel anatomy
- 33. CRT Procedure andDevice Related Risks relative to CS placement CS lead dislogdement 8% CS dissection or perforation 5% Failure of lead placement 8% Phrenic nerve stimulation 2% ALL other risks associated with pacer or ICD implantation and anesthesia in these patients.
- 34. CS Leads theynow come in many shapes and sizes and the the OTW system
- 35. Achieving Cardiac Resynchronization Goal:Atrialsynchronous biventricularpacing Transvenous approachforleft ventricular lead via coronarysinus Back-upepicardial approach Right Atrial Lead Right Ventricular Lead Left Ventricular Lead
- 36.
- 37.
- 38.
- 39. The implant 3separate sticks via Seldinger technique in the subclavian vein -can be done from the right but it is more difficult. Use standard peel back sheaths for the RA and RV leads The RV lead is positioned first - could develop CHB or VT so it is good to have this in (screw-in or tined) Advance the long guide sheath into the RA ( not to the CS) Advance a Coronary Sinus EP catheter via the long guide sheath into the CS – the LAO is the best: point towards the spine. Advance the sheath while pulling back on the CS catheter to get the sheath into the CS Some would use dye at this point to look at the anatomy of the CS and its branches
- 40. The implant Advancethe CS lead with or without the OTW system and make sure you place it in a mid/lateral or posterolateral position. Never go where the LAD would be but where the obtuse marginals would be. Test the CS lead including at 10 volts for phrenic nerve stimulation Pull back on the sheath until it is out of the OS, then peel it out with a retention guide wire in the CS-be careful about dislodgement Position the atrial lead in the RAA (screw-in or tined) Test the ICD with induction of VF twice separated by 3-5 minutes: can do at a later time if the time is > 4 hours or the patient has been unstable in any way. Always use a high energy device in these patients.
- 41. The 3 levelsof asynchrony 1. Intraventricular asynchrony is best treated by placing the LV lead in the best anatomic location-usually the lateral or posterolateral (proven my multiple studies). Get the LV working. 2. Interventricular asynchrony is dealt with by adjusting the V-V interval. Get the RV and the LV to work together. 3. A-V asynchrony is dealt with by adjusting the A-V interval. Get the atria and the ventricles working together.
- 42. Change in LVEF[%] 2% 9% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% P=0.04 -9.2 -28.4 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 P=0.04 Change in LV End-systolic Volume [ml] Improvement Posterolateral or Lateral walls are the best with LBBB where the septum contracts first and then the lateral wall last. Paced at any other LV site Paced at most mechanically delayed LV site
- 43. CRT and TissueDoppler Imaging -a measure of intraventricular delay • Measures dyssynchronous (delayed) contraction patterns @ different areas of the ventricle •Measure from the onset of the QRS to the peak systolic shortening of that segment •Defined as a segment with > 50 ms delay: this indicates intraventricular delay or asynchrony by ECHO criteria •Colors: green- yellow-red (the longest delay of >300 ms)
- 44. AV Delay OptimizationMethods 1. Electrocardiographic COMPANION trial method 2. Echocardiographic (combined) Aortic velocity time integral (VTI) methods Mitral velocity Doppler methods:E and A waves Ritter formula 3. Hemodynamic measurements Pulse pressure method dP/dtmax method
- 45. COMPANION Method: QRS <150 Sensed AV Delay: Intracardiac AV interval: AS to VS = 300 ms Intrinsic QRS duration: QRS = 140 ms
- 46. COMPANION Method: QRS >150 SensedAV Delay: Intracardiac AV interval: AS to VS = 240 ms Intrinsic QRS duration: QRS = 180 ms
- 47. Aortic VTI Method Objective: Identify the AV Delay that yields the maximum cardiac output as determined by an aortic VTI measurement Procedure: Obtain continuous wave Doppler echo of aortic valve outflow to obtain VTI measurement Record VTI values over a range of programmed AV Delays Program the AV Delay value that yields the maximum aortic VTI
- 48. Mitral Velocity DopplerEcho Method Objective: Identify the AV Delay that maximizes LV filling using mitral velocity echocardiographic measurements1 Procedure #1: “A-wave cutoff” Obtain transmitral Doppler echo at a “long” programmed AV Delay during ventricular pacing Shorten the programmed AV Delay by 10-20 ms until the echo Doppler A-wave becomes truncated (A wave is atrial contraction) Lengthen the programmed AV Delay back to the value where there is no A-wave cutoff. This timing should enable ventricular contraction to occur just at the end of atrial systole
- 49. V-V Timing: synchronizethe RV and the LV The best V-V setting by measuring the RVOT and LVOT via PW Doppler V-V above > 40 ms is considered abnormal In normals, the RV will contract before the LV in the heart by -20 ms LV and RV have different outputs in the newer devices that allow sequential instead of simultaneous delivery of output and thus allow for this to be programmable.
- 50. Therapy for HeartFailure EF <40%…then need to evaluate patient for etiology of cardiomyopathy and begin to optimize medical therapy. If the patient is Class 3 or 4 , has a QRS> 130 ms, has had a documented EF<35% for >9 months… then consider for CRT-ICD.
- 51. Stages of HeartFailure
- 52. Summary Large numberof patients studied in multiple RCTs. CRT improves quality of life, exercise capacity, functional capacity, EF, peak VO2. CRT reduces the risk of mortality, worsening HF, and hospitalizations for CHF. CRT + ICD significantly reduces risk of mortality.
- 53.