Complications of left bundle branch area pacing compared with biventricular pacing in candidates for resynchronization therapy: Results of a propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BVP) is a well-established therapy in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, heart failure, and left bundle branch block. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been shown to be a feasible and effective alternative to BVP. Comparative data on the risk of complications between LBBAP and BVP among patients undergoing CRT are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term risk of procedure-related complications between LBBAP and BVP in a cohort of patients undergoing CRT. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, observational study enrolled 668 consecutive patients (mean age 71.2 ± 10.0 years; 52.2% male; 59.4% with New York Heart Association class III-IV heart failure symptoms) with left ventricular ejection fraction 33.4% ± 4.3% who underwent BVP (n = 561) or LBBAP (n = 107) for a class I or II indication for CRT. Propensity score matching for baseline characteristics yielded 93 matched pairs. The rate and nature of intraprocedural and long-term post-procedural complications occurring during follow-up were prospectively collected and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 18 months, procedure-related complications were observed in 16 patients: 12 in BVP (12.9%) and 4 in LBBAP (4.3%) (P = .036). Compared with patients who underwent LBBAP, those who underwent BVP showed a lower complication-free survival (P = .032). In multivariate analysis, BVP resulted an independent predictive factor associated with a higher risk of complications (hazard ratio 3.234; P = .042). Complications related to the coronary sinus lead were most frequently observed in patients who underwent BVP (50.0% of all complications). CONCLUSION: LBBAP was associated with a lower long-term risk of device-related complications compared with BVP in patients with an indication for CRT.

Remote monitoring of implantable cardiac monitors in patients with unexplained syncope: Predictors of false-positive alert episodes.

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring is recommended for patients with implantable cardiac monitors (ICMs), but compared to other cardiac implantable devices, ICMs are less accurate and transmit a higher number of alerts. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the predictors of false-positive (FP) arrhythmic alerts in patients with unexplained syncope who were implanted with ICM and followed by an automatic remote monitoring system. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated all consecutive patients who received a long-sensing vector ICM for unexplained syncope between January 2019 to September 2021 at our Syncope Unit. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the first FP episode. The secondary endpoints included assessing the incidence of FP episodes for all types of algorhythms and indentifying the reasons for the misdetection of these episodes. RESULTS: Among 105 patients (44.8% males, median age 51 years), 51 (48.6%) transmitted at least one FP alert during a median follow-up of 301 days. The presence of pre-ventricular complexes (PVCs) on the resting electrocardiogram was the only clinical characteristic associated with an increased risk of FP alerts (adjusted Hazard ratio [HR] 5.76 [2.66-12.4], p = 0.010). The other significant device-related variables were a low-frequency filter at 0.05 Hz versus the default 0.5 Hz (adjusted HR 3.82 [1.38-10.5], p = 0.010) and the R-wave amplitude (adjusted HR 0.35 [0.13-0.99], p = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Patients who have PVCs are at higher risk of inappropriate ICM activations. To reduce the occurrence of FP alerts, it may be beneficial to target a large R-wave amplitude during device insertion and avoid programming a low-frequency filter at 0.05 Hz.

Clinical course of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients implanted with a transvenous or subcutaneous defibrillator.

AIMS: The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is a life-saving therapy in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) at risk of sudden cardiac death. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator complications are of concern. The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) does not use transvenous leads and is expected to reduce complications. However, it does not provide bradycardia and anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP). The aim of this study was to compare appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions, complications, disease-related adverse events and mortality between HCM patients implanted with a S- or transvenous (TV)-ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive HCM patients implanted with a S- (n = 216) or TV-ICD (n = 211) were enrolled. Propensity-adjusted cumulative Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to compare 5-year event-free survival and the risk of events. The S-ICD patients had lower 5-year risk of appropriate (HR: 0.32; 95%CI: 0.15-0.65; P = 0.002) and inappropriate (HR: 0.44; 95%CI: 0.20-0.95; P = 0.038) ICD interventions, driven by a high incidence of ATP therapy in the TV-ICD group. The S- and TV-ICD patients experienced similar 5-year rate of device-related complications, albeit the risk of major lead-related complications was lower in S-ICD patients (HR: 0.17; 95%CI: 0.038-0.79; P = 0.023). The TV- and S-ICD patients displayed similar risk of disease-related complications (HR: 0.64; 95%CI: 0.27-1.52; P = 0.309) and mortality (HR: 0.74; 95%CI: 0.29-1.87; P = 0.521). CONCLUSION: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients implanted with a S-ICD had lower 5-year risk of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies as well as of major lead-related complications as compared to those implanted with a TV-ICD. Long-term comparative follow-up studies will clarify whether the lower incidence of major lead-related complications will translate into a morbidity or survival benefit.

Ablate and pace: Comparison of outcomes between conduction system pacing and biventricular pacing.

BACKGROUND: Conduction system pacing (CSP), including His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), have been proposed as alternatives to biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients scheduled for ablate and pace (A&P) strategy. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes, including the rate and nature of device-related complications, between BVP and CSP in a cohort of patients undergoing A&P. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, observational study, enrolling consecutive patients undergoing A&P. The risk of device-related complications and of heart failure (HF) hospitalization was prospectively assessed. RESULTS: A total of 373 patients (75.3 ± 8.7 years, 53.9% male, 68.9% with NYHA class ≥III) were enrolled: 263 with BVP, 68 with HBP, and 42 with LBBAP. Baseline characteristics of the three groups were similar. Compared to BVP and HBP, LBBAP was associated with the shortest mean procedural and fluoroscopy times and with the lowest acute capture thresholds (all p < .05). At 12-month follow-up LBBAP maintained the lowest capture thresholds and showed the longest estimated residual battery longevity (all p < .05). At 12-months follow-up the three study groups showed a similar risk of device-related complications (5.7%, 4.4%, and 2.4% for BVP, HBP, and LBBAP, respectively; p = .650), and of HF hospitalization (2.7%, 1.5%, and 2.4% for BVP, HBP, and LBBAP, respectively; p = .850). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of A&P, CSP is a feasible pacing modality, with a midterm safety profile comparable to BVP. LBBAP offers the advantage of reducing procedural times and obtaining lower and stable capture thresholds, with a positive impact on the device longevity.

Rate and nature of complications of conduction system pacing compared with right ventricular pacing: Results of a propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Conduction system pacing (CSP) using His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as an alternative to right ventricular pacing (RVP). Comparative data on the risk of complications between CSP and RVP are lacking. OBJECTIVE: This prospective, multicenter, observational study aimed to compare the long-term risk of device-related complications between CSP and RVP. METHODS: A total of 1029 consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker implantation with CSP (including HBP and LBBAP) or RVP were enrolled. Propensity score matching for baseline characteristics yielded 201 matched pairs. The rate and nature of device-related complications occurring during follow-up were prospectively collected and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up duration of 18 months, device-related complications were observed in 19 patients: 7 in RVP (3.5%) and 12 in CSP (6.0%) (P = .240). On dividing the matched cohort into 3 groups with similar baseline characteristics according to pacing modality (RVP, n = 201; HBP, n = 128; LBBAP, n = 73), patients with HBP showed a significantly higher rate of device-related complications than did patients with RVP (8.6% vs 3.5%; P = .047) and patients with LBBAP (8.6% vs 1.3%; P = .034). Patients with LBBAP showed a rate of device-related complications similar to that of patients with RVP (1.3% vs 3.5%; P = .358). Most of the complications observed in patients with HBP (63.6%) were lead related. CONCLUSION: Globally, CSP was associated with a risk of complications similar to that of RVP. Considering HBP and LBBAP separately, HBP showed a significantly higher risk of complications than did both RVP and LBBAP whereas LBBAP showed a risk of complications similar to that of RVP.

Air entrapment as a cause of early inappropriate shocks after subcutaneous defibrillator implant: A case series.

Inappropriate shock (IAS) is the most frequent device-related complication among patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD). Air entrapment (AE) has been described as an underdiagnosed cause of early postimplant IAS. We report 6 consecutive cases of early IAS after S-ICD implant, in whom the electrogram analysis (EGM) and/or chest radiography (CXR) were consistent with AE.

Effectiveness and safety of implantable loop recorder and clinical utility of remote monitoring in patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope.

BACKGROUND: Implantable loop recorder (ILR) is still underutilized in clinical practice, especially in the setting of elderly patients with recurrent, traumatic, unexplained syncope. Data on the actual risk of traumatic syncopal recurrence during ILR monitoring in this specific patient setting are lacking. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Prospective, multicentre registry enrolling consecutive patients undergoing ILR insertion for unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope. In a proportion of enrolled patients, remote monitoring (RM) was used for device follow-up. The risk of traumatic and non-traumatic syncopal recurrences during ILR observation were prospectively assessed. RESULTS: A total of 483 consecutive patients (68±14 years, 59% male) were enrolled. During a median follow-up of 18 months, a final diagnosis was reached in 270 patients (55.9%). The risk of syncopal and traumatic syncopal recurrence was of 26.5 and 9.3%, respectively. RM significantly reduced the time to diagnosis (19.7±10.3 vs. 22.1±10.8 months; p=0.015) and was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of syncope recurrence of 48% (p<0.001), and of traumatic syncope recurrence of 49% (p=0.018). CONCLUSIONS: ILR monitoring is effective and safe in patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope. RM reduces the time to diagnosis and significantly reduces the risk of traumatic and non-traumatic syncopal relapses.

Effects of Cardiac Contractility Modulation Electrodes on Tricuspid Regurgitation in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is an innovative therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction delivered by a cardiac implantable device (Optimizer Smart®). One of the most prominent periprocedural complications common to all cardiac implantable devices (CIDs) is tricuspid regurgitation (TR) due to the placement of the right ventricular endocardial leads. To date, no published studies have assessed the changes in the TR degree in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) after the implantation of cardiac contractility modulation therapy devices. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the implantation of the trans-tricuspid leads required to deliver CCM therapy on the severity of TR in patients with HFrEF who previously underwent ICD implantation. METHODS: We enrolled 30 HFrEF patients who underwent CCM therapy between November 2020 and October 2021. For all the patients, echocardiographic evaluations of TR were performed according to current guidelines 24 h before and six months after the Optimizer Smart® implant was applied. RESULTS: At the 6-month follow-up, the grade of TR remained unchanged compared to the preimplant grade. The value of the vena contracta (VC) of TR was 0.40 ± 0.19 cm in the preimplant period and 0.45 ± 0.21 cm at the 6-month follow-up (p = 0.33). Similarly, the TR proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) radius value was unchanged at follow-up (0.54 ± 0.22 cm vs. 0.62 ± 0.20 cm; p = 0.18). No statistically significant difference existed between the preimplant VC and PISA radius values, irrespective of the device type. CONCLUSIONS: The implantation of right ventricular electrodes for the delivery of CCM therapy did not worsen tricuspid regurgitation in patients with HFrEF and ICD.

The Effects of Device-Based Cardiac Contractility Modulation Therapy on Left Ventricle Global Longitudinal Strain and Myocardial Mechano-Energetic Efficiency in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Virtually all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction have a reduction of myocardial mechano-energetic efficiency (MEE). Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is a novel therapy for the treatment of patients with HFrEF, in whom it improves the quality of life and functional capacity, reduces hospitalizations, and induces biventricular reverse remodeling. However, the effects of CCM on MEE and global longitudinal strain (GLS) are still unknown; therefore, this study aims to evaluate whether CCM therapy can improve the MEE of patients with HFrEF. METHODS: We enrolled 25 patients with HFrEF who received an Optimizer Smart implant (the device that develops CCM therapy) between January 2018 and January 2021. Clinical and echocardiographic evaluations were performed in all patients 24 h before and six months after CCM therapy. RESULTS: At six months, follow-up patients who underwent CCM therapy showed an increase of left ventricular ejection fraction (30.8 ± 7.1 vs. 36.1 ± 6.9%; p = 0.032) as well a rise of GLS 10.3 ± 2.7 vs. -12.9 ± 4.2; p = 0.018), of MEE (32.2 ± 10.1 vs. 38.6 ± 7.6 mL/s; p = 0.013) and of MEE index (18.4 ± 6.3 vs. 24.3 ± 6.7 mL/s/g; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: CCM therapy increased left ventricular performance, improving left ventricular ejection fraction, GLS, as well as MEE and MEEi.

Impact of atrioventricular junction ablation and CRT-D on long-term mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction, permanent, refractory atrial fibrillation, and narrow QRS: Results of a propensity-matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with symptomatic permanent atrial fibrillation (PEAF) and narrow QRS, atrio-ventricular junction ablation (AVJA) plus cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is superior to medical therapy in reducing heart failure (HF) hospitalization and all-cause mortality. To compare the mortality of a population of patients with HF, reduced EF (rEF), and PEAF treated with AVJA plus CRT with that of a contemporary cohort of patients in sinus rhythm (SR) with similar baseline characteristics. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective, multicentre, observational study, all-cause mortality in a group of consecutive patients undergoing AVJA and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) combined with CRT implantation for HFrEF, narrow QRS, and PEAF with uncontrolled ventricular rate was compared with that of a contemporary cohort of patients in SR undergoing ICD implantation (not combined with CRT) for HFrEF and narrow QRS. Individual 1:1 propensity matching of baseline characteristics was performed. A total of 824 patients were enrolled. Propensity matching yielded 107 matched pairs. After a median follow-up of 52 months, all-cause mortality was similar in patients treated with AVJA plus CRT and in the control group (p = .434). In AVJA plus CRT patients, mortality was significantly lower than in control group patients with a history of paroxysmal/persistent AF (n = 45, p = .020), and similar to that of patients without a history of AF (n = 62, p = .459). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for patient characteristics, the long-term prognosis of patients with HFrEF, narrow QRS, and PEAF who underwent AVJA plus CRT was similar to that of a population of patients in SR with similar characteristics.

Levosimendan as a "Bridge to Optimization" in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection-A Single-Center Study.

Background: Patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction often cannot tolerate target doses of guideline-directed medical therapy due to symptomatic hypotension, renal dysfunction, and associated electrolyte abnormalities. While levosimendan can facilitate the titration of ß-blockers in patients with advanced HFrEF, it is unclear whether ambulatory levosimendan infusions would offer the same benefit. In this prospective study, we investigate the effects of intermittent ambulatory levosimendan infusions on the uptitration of disease-modifying drugs. Methods: We enrolled 37 patients with advanced HFrEF who received repeated ambulatory infusions of levosimendan between January 2018 and January 2021. The demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were acquired 24 h before the first and the last ambulatory levosimendan infusion. Results: At the 1 year follow-up, the enrolled patients were on significantly higher doses of guideline-directed medical therapy, including bisoprolol (3.2 ± 2.8 mg vs. 5.9 ± 4.1 mg; p = 0.02), sacubitril/valsartan (41.67 ± 32.48 mg vs. 68.5 ± 35.72 mg; p = 0.01), and eplerenone (12.7 ± 8.5 mg vs. 22.8 ± 13.6 mg; p = 0.03). Furthermore, a substantial decrease in the furosemide dose was observed (123.2 ± 32.48 mg vs. 81.6 ± 19.47 mg; p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Levosimendan facilitates the optimization of disease-modifying heart failure medications in previously intolerant advanced HFrEF patients.

Management of older patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope and bifascicular block: Implantable loop recorder versus empiric pacemaker implantation-Results of a propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: In patients with unexplained syncope and bifascicular block (BFB), syncope may be caused by intermittent atrioventricular (AV) block. When a correlation between syncope and bradyarrhythmia is not documented in these patients, 2 alternative management strategies can be adopted: (1) empiric pacemaker (PM) implantation or (2) long-term continuous electrocardiographic monitoring by implantable loop recorder (ILR). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of syncope recurrence associated with empiric PM implantation or ILR monitoring. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, observational study enrolled consecutive patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope and BFB who underwent ILR monitoring or empiric PM implantation. The risk and causes of syncope recurrence were assessed and compared between the 2 groups. Individual 1:1 propensity matching of baseline characteristics was performed. RESULTS: A total of 309 consecutive patients (age 77.2 ± 12.2 years; 60.8% male) were enrolled. Propensity matching yielded 89 matched pairs. After median follow-up of 33 months, empiric PM implantation was associated with a significantly lower risk of syncope recurrence than ILR monitoring (19.1 vs 46.1%; P <.001). A total of 35 patients (39.3%) who underwent ILR monitoring developed bradyarrhythmias (68.6% paroxysmal AV block) requiring PM implantation during follow-up. Excluding bradyarrhythmic syncope, the most frequent causes of syncope recurrence in both study groups were reflex syncope and orthostatic hypotension. CONCLUSION: In patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope and BFB, empiric PM implantation significantly reduced the risk of syncope recurrence in comparison with ILR monitoring. A high rate of patients who underwent ILR monitoring developed bradyarrhythmias requiring PM implantation.

Device-Related Complications and Inappropriate Therapies Among Subcutaneous vs. Transvenous Implantable Defibrillator Recipients: Insight Monaldi Rhythm Registry.

Introduction: In the context of randomized clinical trials, subcutaneous implantable cardiac defibrillators (S-ICDs) are non-inferior to transvenous ICDs (T-ICDs) concerning device-related complications or inappropriate shocks in patients with an indication for defibrillator therapy and not in need of pacing. We aimed at describing the clinical features of patients who underwent S-ICD implantation in our clinical practice, as well as the ICD-related complications and the inappropriate therapies among S-ICD vs. T-ICD recipients during a long-term follow-up. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing ICD, both S-ICD and TV-ICD, at Monaldi Hospital from January 1, 2015 to January 1, 2019 and followed up at our institution were included in the present analysis. The clinical variables associated with S-ICD implantation were evaluated by logistic regression analyses. We collected the ICD inappropriate therapies, ICD-related complications (including both pulse generator and lead-related complications), ICD-related infections, appropriate ICD therapies, and overall mortality. Kaplan-Meier (KM) analyses were performed to assess the risk of clinical outcome events between the two subgroups. A time-dependent Cox regression analysis was performed to adjust the results. Results: Total 607 consecutive patients (mean age 53.8 ± 16.8, male 77.8%) with both TV-ICD (n: 290, 47.8%) and S-ICD (n: 317, 52.2%), implanted and followed at our center for a mean follow-up of 1614 ± 1018 days, were included in the study. At multivariate logistic regression analysis, an independent association between S-ICD implantation and ionic channel disease [OR: 6.01 (2.26-15.87); p < 0.0001] and ischemic cardiomyopathy [OR: 0.20 (0.12-0.35); p < 0.0001] was shown. The KM analysis did not show a significantly different risk of the inappropriate ICD therapies (log rank p = 0.64) between the two subgroups; conversely, a significant increase in the risk of ICD-related complications (log rank p = 0.02) and infections (log rank p = 0.02) in TV-ICD group was shown. The adjusted risk for ICD-related infections [OR: 0.07 (0.009-0.55), p = 0.01] and complications [0.31 (0.12-0.81), p = 0.01] was significantly lower among patients with S-ICD. Conclusions: The choice to implant S-ICD was mainly driven by younger age and the presence of ionic channel disease; conversely ischemic cardiomyopathy reduces the probability to use this technology. No significant differences in inappropriate ICD therapies were shown among S-ICD vs. TV-ICD group; moreover, S-ICD is characterized by a lower rate of infectious and non-infectious complications leading to surgical revision or extraction.

A mobile app for improving the compliance with remote management of patients with cardiac implantable devices: a multicenter evaluation in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The remote device management (RM) is recommended for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). RM underutilization is frequently driven by the lack of correct system activation. The MyLATITUDE Patient App (Boston Scientific) has been developed to encourage patient compliance with RM by providing information on communicator setup, troubleshooting, and connection status of the communicator. METHODS: At 14 centers, patients with CIEDs were invited to download and install the App on a mobile device. After 3 months, patients were asked to complete an ad hoc questionnaire to evaluate their experience. RESULTS: The App was proposed to 242 consecutive patients: 81 before RM activation, and 161 during follow-up. The App was successfully installed by 177 (73%) patients. The time required for activation of the communicator and the need for additional support were similar between patients who followed the indications provided by the App and those who underwent standard in-clinic training. During follow-up, notifications of lack of connection were received by 20 (11%) patients and missed transmission by 22 (12%). The median time from notification to resolution was 2 days. After 3 months, 175 (99%) communicators of the 177 patients who installed the App were in "Monitored" status versus 113 (94%) of 120 patients without the App installed (p=0.033). The use of the app made 84% of patients feel reassured. CONCLUSIONS: The App was well accepted by CIED patients and offered support for communicator management and installation. Its use enabled patients to remain connected with greater continuity during follow-up.

Use of Cardiac Contractility Modulation as Bridge to Transplant in an Obese Patient With Advanced Heart Failure: A Case Report.

Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is a novel device-based therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In randomized clinical trials and real-life studies, CCM has been shown to improve exercise tolerance and quality of life, reverse left ventricular remodeling and reduce hospitalization in patients with HFrEF. In this case report, we describe for the first time the use of CCM as a "bridge to transplant" in a young obese patient with advanced heart failure due to non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. The patient had a poor quality of life and frequent heart failure-related hospitalizations despite the optimal medical therapy and, due to obesity, a suitable heart donor was unlikely to be identified in the short term and due to severe obesity risk of complications after implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) was very high.

Add-on Therapy With Sacubitril/Valsartan and Clinical Outcomes in CRT-D Nonresponder Patients.

ABSTRACT: No data on the add-on sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) therapy among cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) nonresponder patients are currently available in literature. We conducted a prospective observational study including 190 CRT-D nonresponder patients with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction despite the optimal medical therapy from at least 1 year. The primary endpoint was the rate of additional responders (left ventricular end-systolic volume reduction >15%) at 12 months from the introduction of S/V therapy. At the end of the 12 months follow-up, 37 patients (19.5%) were deemed as "additional responders" to the combination use of CRT + S/V therapy. The only clinical predictor of additional response was a lower left ventricular ejection fraction [OR 0.881 (0.815-0.953), P = 0.002] at baseline. At 12 months follow-up, there were significant improvements in heart failure (HF) symptoms and functional status [New York Heart Association 2 (2-3) vs. 1 (1-2), P < 0.001; physical activity duration/day: 10 (8-12) vs. 13 (10-18) hours, P < 0.001]. Compared with the 12 months preceding S/V introduction, there were significant reductions in the rate of HF rehospitalization (35.5% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.001), in atrial tachycardia/atrial fibrillation burden [6.0 (5.0-8.0) % vs. 0 (0-2.0) %, P < 0.001] and in the proportions of patients experiencing ventricular arrhythmias (21.6% vs. 6.3%; P < 0.001). Our results indicate that S/V add-on therapy in CRT-D nonresponder patients is associated with 19.5% of additional responders, a reduction in HF symptoms and rehospitalizations, AF burden, and ventricular arrhythmias.

Echocardiography in Advanced Heart Failure for Diagnosis, Management, and Prognosis.

Advanced heart failure, an end-stage disease characterized by high mortality and morbidity despite standard medical therapy, requires various therapeutic strategies like heart transplant and long-term mechanical circulatory support. Echocardiography is the main imaging technique to identify transitions to advanced stages of disease and guide risk stratification and therapeutic decision-making processes. Progressive development of advanced echocardiographic techniques allows more comprehensive assessment of the hemodynamic and structural profiles of patients with advanced heart failure, and its use in clinical practice continues to expand. This article provides an overview of basic and emerging echocardiographic tools to assess patients with advanced heart failure.