Biventricular pacing improves cardiac function and prevents further left atrial remodeling in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation after atrioventricular node ablation.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have demonstrated benefits of biventricular (BiV) pacing in patients with advanced heart failure, intraventricular conduction delay, and atrial fibrillation (AF) post-atrioventricular (AV) node ablation. The AV Node Ablation with CLS and CRT Pacing Therapies for Treatment of AF trial (AVAIL CLS/CRT) was designed to demonstrate superiority of BiV pacing in patients with AF after AV node ablation, to evaluate its effects on cardiac structure and function, and to investigate additional benefits of Closed Loop Stimulation (CLS) (BIOTRONIK, Berlin, Germany). METHODS: Patients with refractory AF underwent AV node ablation and were randomized (2:2:1) to BiV pacing with CLS, BiV pacing with accelerometer, or right ventricular (RV) pacing. Echocardiography was performed at baseline and 6 months, with paired data available for 108 patients. RESULTS: The RV pacing contributed to significant increase in left atrial volume, left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume, and LV mass compared to BiV pacing. Ejection fraction decreased insignificantly with RV pacing compared to significant increase with BiV pacing. Interventricular dyssynchrony significantly decreased with BiV compared with RV pacing. Closed Loop Stimulation did not result in additional echocardiographic changes; heart rate distribution was significantly wider with CLS. All groups showed significant improvement in 6-minute walk distance, quality-of-life score, and New York Heart Association class. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, RV pacing results in significant increase in left atrial volume, LV mass, and worsening of LV contractility compared to patients receiving BiV pacing post-AV node ablation for refractory AF. Closed Loop Stimulation was not associated with additional structural changes but resulted in significantly wider heart rate distribution.

A new endocardial "over-the-wire" or stylet-driven left ventricular lead: first clinical experience.

Transvenous left ventricular (LV) leads are primarily inserted "over-the-wire" (OTW). However, a stylet-driven (SD) approach may be a helpful alternative. A new polyurethane-coated, unipolar LV lead can be placed either by a stylet or a guide wire, which can be inserted into the lead body from both ends. The multicenter OVID study evaluates the clinical performance of this new steroid- and nonsteroid eluting lead. The primary endpoint is the LV lead implant success rate after identification of the coronary sinus (CS). Secondary endpoints include complication rate, short- and long-term lead characteristics, overall procedure and LV lead placement duration, total fluoroscopy time, and lead handling characteristics ratings. To date, 96 patients with heart failure (68 +/- 9 years old, 76% men) are enrolled. The CS was identified in 95 patients and, in 85 (88.5%), the LV lead was successfully implanted. The final lead positioning was lateral in 41%, posterolateral in 35%, anterolateral in 18%, and great cardiac vein in 6% of patients. In 70%, the 85 successful implantations, both stylet-driven and guide-wire techniques were used, a stylet only was used in 22%, and a guide wire only in 8%. Mean overall duration of 85 successful procedures was 112 +/- 40 minutes, total fluoroscopy time 28 +/- 15 minutes, and the duration of LV lead placement was 35 +/- 29 minutes. During a 3-month follow-up, the loss of LV capture occurred in three and phrenic nerve stimulation in six patients. The mean long-term pacing threshold is 0.8 V/0.5 ms and pacing impedance is 550 Omega. The OVID data suggest that these new leads are safe and effective. The choice of both OTW and SD techniques during lead implantation offers greater procedural flexibility.