Effects of haemodynamically atrio-ventricular optimized His bundle pacing on heart failure symptoms and exercise capacity: the His Optimized Pacing Evaluated for Heart Failure (HOPE-HF) randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial.

AIMS: Excessive prolongation of PR interval impairs coupling of atrio-ventricular (AV) contraction, which reduces left ventricular pre-load and stroke volume, and worsens symptoms. His bundle pacing allows AV delay shortening while maintaining normal ventricular activation. HOPE-HF evaluated whether AV optimized His pacing is preferable to no-pacing, in a double-blind cross-over fashion, in patients with heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%, PR interval ≥200 ms and either QRS ≤140 ms or right bundle branch block. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients had atrial and His bundle leads implanted (and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead if clinically indicated) and were randomized to 6 months of pacing and 6 months of no-pacing utilizing a cross-over design. The primary outcome was peak oxygen uptake during symptom-limited exercise. Quality of life, LVEF and patients' holistic symptomatic preference between arms were secondary outcomes. Overall, 167 patients were randomized: 90% men, 69 ± 10 years, QRS duration 124 ± 26 ms, PR interval 249 ± 59 ms, LVEF 33 ± 9%. Neither peak oxygen uptake (+0.25 ml/kg/min, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.23 to +0.73, p = 0.3) nor LVEF (+0.5%, 95% CI -0.7 to 1.6, p = 0.4) changed with pacing but Minnesota Living with Heart Failure quality of life improved significantly (-3.7, 95% CI -7.1 to -0.3, p = 0.03). Seventy-six percent of patients preferred His bundle pacing-on and 24% pacing-off (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: His bundle pacing did not increase peak oxygen uptake but, under double-blind conditions, significantly improved quality of life and was symptomatically preferred by the clear majority of patients. Ventricular pacing delivered via the His bundle did not adversely impact ventricular function during the 6 months.

Quantification of Ischemia As a Prognostic Mandate for Coronary Revascularization in Asymptomatic Patients: How Much Is Enough?

The aim of this study was to investigate whether asymptomatic patients with known coronary artery disease and demonstrable myocardial ischemia warrant revascularization on prognostic grounds. A Medline and PubMed search was performed, including 7 trials with data discussed and concise reviews of prominent articles in the field. The magnitude of inducible ischemia in those with known coronary disease correlates closely with poor cardiovascular outcomes in terms of death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization, and revascularization. Patients with ≥10% inducible ischemia experience a survival advantage when revascularized with a reduction in mortality of greater than 50% regardless of symptoms (P < 0.00001). Evidence also suggests that left ventricular function remains preserved in those who are revascularized when compared with medical therapy alone; left ventricular ejection fraction 53.9% versus 48.8% (P < 0.001). Silent ischemia is a useful prognostic marker in those with known coronary disease. It is recommended that asymptomatic patients with known coronary disease be revascularized on prognostic grounds if ≥10% ischemia can be demonstrated on nuclear or myocardial perfusion scan, ≥3 segments of regional wall motion abnormality on stress echocardiography/cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, or ≥2 segments with perfusion deficits on stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

One-Hour High Sensitivity Troponin Testing: A Safe and Effective Triage Tool for the Emergency Department.

The latest European Society of Cardiology guideline on the management of acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-elevation stipulates several acceptable pathways through which patients presenting with chest pain can be assessed for unstable coronary disease. This article reviews the data behind the "rule-in and rule-out algorithm," which can exclude acute myocardial infarction within 1 hour of presentation through the use of fifth generation high-sensitivity troponin assays.

Multicenter Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial Comparing Hemodynamic Optimization Against Echocardiographic Optimization of AV and VV Delay of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: The BRAVO Trial.

OBJECTIVES: BRAVO (British Randomized Controlled Trial of AV and VV Optimization) is a multicenter, randomized, crossover, noninferiority trial comparing echocardiographic optimization of atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular delay with a noninvasive blood pressure method. BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy including AV delay optimization confers clinical benefit, but the optimization requires time and expertise to perform. METHODS: This study randomized patients to echocardiographic optimization or hemodynamic optimization using multiple-replicate beat-by-beat noninvasive blood pressure at baseline; after 6 months, participants were crossed over to the other optimization arm of the trial. The primary outcome was exercise capacity, quantified as peak exercise oxygen uptake. Secondary outcome measures were echocardiographic left ventricular (LV) remodeling, quality-of-life scores, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. RESULTS: A total of 401 patients were enrolled, the median age was 69 years, 78% of patients were men, and the New York Heart Association functional class was II in 84% and III in 16%. The primary endpoint, peak oxygen uptake, met the criterion for noninferiority (pnoninferiority = 0.0001), with no significant difference between the hemodynamically optimized arm and echocardiographically optimized arm of the trial (mean difference 0.1 ml/kg/min). Secondary endpoints for noninferiority were also met for symptoms (mean difference in Minnesota score 1; pnoninferiority = 0.002) and hormonal changes (mean change in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide -10 pg/ml; pnoninferiority = 0.002). There was no significant difference in LV size (mean change in LV systolic dimension 1 mm; pnoninferiority < 0.001; LV diastolic dimension 0 mm; pnoninferiority <0.001). In 30% of patients the AV delay identified as optimal was more than 20 ms from the nominal setting of 120 ms. CONCLUSIONS: Optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices by using noninvasive blood pressure is noninferior to echocardiographic optimization. Therefore, noninvasive hemodynamic optimization is an acceptable alternative that has the potential to be automated and thus more easily implemented. (British Randomized Controlled Trial of AV and VV Optimization [BRAVO]; NCT01258829).

Implantation of a biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator via the femoral vein.

Permanent pacing with access gained via the femoral vein has been described since 1980. Here we describe implantation of a biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in a case where normal implantation using thoracic venous access was not possible due to anatomical anomalies. The advantages of this technique over epicardial pacing in such a case are discussed, as are the practical difficulties involved when applying this technique to the implantation of a biventricular ICD.