Effect of cardiac rehabilitation on functional and emotional status in patients after transcatheter aortic-valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) is an established alternative therapy in patients with severe aortic stenosis and a high surgical risk. Despite a rapid growth in its use, very few data exist about the efficacy of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in these patients. We assessed the hypothesis that patients after TAVI benefit from CR, compared to patients after surgical aortic-valve replacement (sAVR). METHODS: From September 2009 to August 2011, 442 consecutive patients after TAVI (n = 76) or sAVR (n = 366) were referred to a 3-week CR. Data regarding patient characteristics as well as changes of functional (6-min walk test. 6-MWT), bicycle exercise test), and emotional status (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were retrospectively evaluated and compared between groups after propensity score adjustment. RESULTS: Patients after TAVI were significantly older (p < 0.001), more female (p < 0.001), and had more often coronary artery disease (p = 0.027), renal failure (p = 0.012) and a pacemaker (p = 0.032). During CR, distance in 6-MWT (both groups p ≤ 0.001) and exercise capacity (sAVR p ≤ 0.001, TAVI p ≤ 0.05) significantly increased in both groups. Only patients after sAVR demonstrated a significant reduction in anxiety and depression (p ≤ 0.001). After propensity scores adjustment, changes were not significantly different between sAVR and TAVI, with the exception of 6-MWT (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Patients after TAVI benefit from cardiac rehabilitation despite their older age and comorbidities. CR is a helpful tool to maintain independency for daily life activities and participation in socio-cultural life.

Extraordinarily favorable left ventricular reverse remodeling through long-term cardiac resynchronization: super-response to cardiac resynchronization.

BACKGROUND: Some chronic heart failure (CHF) patients show remarkable improvement in left ventricular (LV) remodeling after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), for unclear reasons. This study aimed at identifying predictors of an extraordinarily favorable response to CRT. METHODS: We studied 136 CRT patients (104 men, median 66 years, QRS 162 ms, left ventricular ejection fraction 24 ± 7%, 70% coronary disease, all left bundle branch block [LBBB]). We measured LV end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) before and after long-term (9.4 ± 6.3 months) CRT. At baseline, LV pre-ejection interval (LVPEI), interventricular mechanical delay (IVMD), LV dyssynchrony (standard deviation of electromechanical delays [SDEMD] in eight LV segments), exercise capacity (pVO(2)), and ventilatory efficiency (VE/VCO(2)) were assessed. Patients with a LVEDD reduction beyond the 80th percentile (high responders [HR]) were compared to low responders (LR). RESULTS: In the HR group (n = 22), LVEDD was reduced from 71 to 52 mm (LR 64-61 mm, P < 0.001). HR had predominantly nonischemic heart disease (HR: 72%, LR: 44%, P = 0.019), tended to have a wider QRS (HR: 178 ms, LR: 162 ms, P = 0.066), had a longer LVPEI (HR: 179 ms, LR: 155 ms, P = 0.004), wider IVMD (HR: 60 ms, LR 48 ms, P = 0.05), larger LVEDD (P = 0.002), higher SDEMD (HR: 69 ms, LR: 46 ms, P = 0.044), but higher pVO(2) (HR: 17.5 mL/min/kg, LR: 13.5 mL/kg/min, P = 0.025) and lower VE/VCO(2) (HR: 31, LR: 35, P = 0.043), all compared to LR patients. CONCLUSION: Extraordinarily favorable reverse LV remodeling through CRT in CHF and LBBB appears to require a particularly dilated LV due to nonischemic heart disease with pronounced electromechanical alteration, but with a fairly preserved functional capacity before CRT.

Ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation occurs less often in patients with left bundle branch block and combined resynchronization and defibrillators than in patients with narrow QRS and conventional defibrillators.

AIMS: Mortality in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) is high. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces symptoms and mortality in CHF patients with LBBB. Whether CRT promotes or prevents ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) remains controversial, however. Therefore, we aimed to analyse arrhythmia-related CRT effects and characterized the VT/VF incidence in CRT-defibrillator patients and matched controls with conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 134 patients [110 men, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 24 ± 8%, 71 coronary artery disease, CRT-ICD 67, conventional ICD matched controls 67, follow-up 31 ± 17 months] and monitored overall survival and the time to a first VT/VF episode. Controls did not have LBBB. They were otherwise matched for age, LVEF, and follow-up duration. Gender and underlying disease did not differ between the groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed more favourable arrhythmia-free survival in CRT-ICD vs. conventional ICD patients [hazard ratio (HR) 2.26, confidence interval (CI) 1.09-4.67, log rank P = 0.023]. The difference persisted in the multivariate Cox regression analysis (HR 3.25, CI 1.18-8.93, P= 0.022). Overall survival was similar in both groups (HR 1.45, CI 0.55-3.82, P = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic heart failure patients with LBBB treated with CRT-ICD, experience less and delayed VT/VF episodes compared with matched controls without LBBB receiving conventional ICD. In the long-term, CRT appears to exert antiarrhythmic effects and to attenuate the particularly high arrhythmia-related risk of CHF patients with LBBB. The incremental benefit of adding the ICD option to CRT pacing in LBBB patients appears questionable.

Long-term survival of routine implantable cardioverter/defibrillator recipients appears to be significantly impaired with concomitant diuretics and improved with aldosterone antagonists.

Evidence-based treatment for heart failure (HF) comprises beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and aldosterone receptor antagonists (ARA). Diuretics (DR) are prescribed in acute and chronic HF, but their impact on survival and ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT/VF) is unclear. The present observational study aims to examine the influence of DR and ARA on survival and appropriate cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) treatment episodes in routine ICD patients. In 352 consecutive ICD patients (291 men, 60 ± 12 years, LVEF 34 ± 15%, follow-up 37 ± 19 months) overall survival and the time to a first appropriate VT/VF episode were assessed. Electrograms were validated. Potassium and creatinine serum levels and the medical treatment regimen for heart failure were documented at baseline. Multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed significantly worse survival for patients with DR compared to those without DR (OR 0.24, CI 0.08-0.76, P= 0.016), whereas the group with ARA had better survival compared to patients without (OR 2.05, CI 1.02-4.10, P= 0.04). Patient groups did not differ regarding survival without incident VT/VF (DR+ vs. DR- OR 1.10, CI 0.67-1.83, P= 0.70; OR 0.66, CI 0.40-1.09, P= 0.10). Long-term survival appears to be compromised in ICD patients receiving concomitant DR, but is favorably influenced by ARA, although VT/VF incidence does not differ. Randomized analyses are warranted to assess long-term prognostic effects of DR in HF.

Pacemaker-based analysis of atrioventricular conduction and atrial tachyarrhythmias in patients with primary sinus node dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with symptomatic sinus node disease (SND) receive DDDR pacemakers (PM) in order to cover SND and atrioventricular (AV) block from the outset. But the concern about adverse effects of right ventricular pacing (RVP) is increasing. So far, data on the incidence of AV block in SND are based on clinical events. The study undertakes to assess and appraise AV block and atrial tachyarrhythmias (AT) from memory and electrograms of a dual-chamber PM set to an AAIR-DDDR switch mode (AAISafeR). METHODS: A dual-chamber PM incorporating the AAISafeR mode was implanted in 58 patients (70 +/- 10 years, 28 males) with SND, but without AV block >I. AV block and AT episodes were retrieved from the PM memory and validated from electrograms. AV block episodes were classified potentially relevant while comprising AV block III or AV block I/II during exercise. RESULTS: The patients experienced a median of 90 (interquartile range 7-1,084) commutations. Possibly relevant AV block occurred in 32 patients (55%). Validation revealed high-quality PM-based categorization. The RVP prevalence was 0% (0-16%). The median AT prevalence was 0.03 (0-26) min/day. RVP was the only multivariate predictor of AT (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Potentially relevant AV block occurs frequently in patients with SND. Nonetheless, the RVP prevalence is kept low through the AAISafeR mode. The protection of SND patients with demand-actuated ventricular pacing appears reasonable. The AT prevalence is low in SND patients treated by the AAISafeR mode. Even low RVP proportions appear to favor AT. Prospective evaluation is needed.

Right ventricular pacing is associated with impaired overall survival, but not with an increased incidence of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in routine cardioverter/defibrillator recipients with reservedly programmed pacing.

AIMS: Data from previous defibrillator studies raised concern about right ventricular pacing (RVP) promoting heart failure progression and mortality in implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) patients. The present observational study re-examined the association of RVP, survival, and ventricular tachyarrhythmias/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) in routine ICD patients with restrictively programmed pacing. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 213 ICD patients [183 men, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 37 +/- 15%, follow-up 37 +/- 18 months, no advanced atrioventricular (AV) block], the RVP proportion, survival, and the time to a first appropriate VT/VF episode were assessed. Electrograms were validated and the overall survival was determined. The RVP prevalence was dichotomized at > or = 30% (high RVP) vs. <30% (low RVP). High RVP (RVP 94%, n = 24) and low RVP (RVP 0%, n = 189) patients had similar LVEF, underlying heart disease, ICD indication, and medication. Multivariate Cox regression showed no difference in survival without appropriate VT/VF treatment [odds ratio (OR): 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.41-2.04, P = 0.83]. Overall survival was significantly more favourable in low RVP patients (OR: 0.34, CI: 0.13-0.91, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Frequent RVP is associated with impaired survival in ICD patients despite conservative pacing settings. Implantable cardioverter/defibrillator patients requiring concomitant bradycardia pacing should be cared for with particular attention to clinical worsening. Right ventricular pacing prevention and alternative modalities of ventricular pacing need prospective evaluation.

Survival and appropriate device interventions in recipients of cardioverter defibrillators implanted for the primary versus secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) implanted after an episode of ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA) or in patients at high risk of VTA lower the long-term mortality. Comparisons of the clinical outcomes of the two indications are scarce. METHODS: The study enrolled 360 consecutive ICD recipients. The device was implanted for secondary prevention in 150 patients, whose mean age was 60 +/- 14 years, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 40 +/- 16%, and for primary prevention in 210 patients, whose mean age was 61 +/- 11 years, and mean LVEF was 31 +/- 13%. All-cause mortality and time to first appropriate ICD therapy were measured. RESULTS: The two study groups were similar with respect to age and prevalence of coronary artery disease. Mean LVEF was higher in the secondary prevention group (P = 0.001). Cox regression analysis revealed a significantly shorter time to first appropriate ICD therapy in the secondary prevention group (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.30 - 0.87, P = 0.01). Over a mean follow-up of 37 +/- 19 months, the all-cause mortality in the overall population was 12.7%, and was similar in both subgroups (HR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.55-1.77, P = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: The long-term mortality in this unselected population of ICD recipients was low. Patients treated for secondary prevention received earlier appropriate ICD therapy than patients treated for primary prevention. Long-term mortality was similar in both groups. The higher VT incidence of VTA was effectively treated by the ICD and was not associated with a higher mortality.

Reduction of right ventricular pacing in patients with sinus node dysfunction through programming a long atrioventricular delay along with the DDIR mode.

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular (RV) pacing increases the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and hospitalization rate for heart failure. Many patients with sinus node dysfunction (SND) are implanted with a DDDR pacemaker to ensure the treatment of slowly conducted atrial fibrillation and atrioventricular (AV) block. Many pacemakers are never reprogrammed after implantation. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of programming DDIR with a long AV delay in patients with SND and preserved AV conduction as a possible strategy to reduce RV pacing in comparison with a nominal DDDR setting including an AV search hysteresis. METHODS: In 61 patients (70 +/- 10 years, 34 male, PR < 200 ms, AV-Wenckebach rate at > or =130 bpm) with symptomatic SND a DDDR pacemaker was implanted. The cumulative prevalence of right ventricular pacing was assessed according to the pacemaker counter in the nominal DDDR-Mode (AV delay 150/120 ms after atrial pacing/sensing, AV search hysteresis active) during the first postoperative days and in DDIR with an individually programmed long fixed AV delay after 100 days (median). RESULTS: With the nominal DDDR mode the median incidence of right ventricular pacing amounted to 25.2%, whereas with DDIR and long AV delay the median prevalence of RV pacing was significantly reduced to 1.1% (P < 0.001). In 30 patients (49%) right ventricular pacing was almost completely (<1%) eliminated, n = 22 (36%) had >1% <20% and n = 4 (7%) had >40% right ventricular pacing. The median PR interval was 161 ms. The median AV interval with DDIR was 280 ms. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of right ventricular pacing in patients with SND and preserved AV conduction, who are treated with a dual chamber pacemaker, can significantly be reduced by programming DDIR with a long, individually adapted AV delay when compared with a nominal DDDR setting, but nonetheless in some patients this strategy produces a high proportion of disadvantageous RV pacing. The DDIR mode with long AV delay provides an effective strategy to reduce unnecessary right ventricular pacing but the effect has to be verified in every single patient.

Electrical remodeling and cardiac dimensions in patients treated by cardiac resynchronization and heart failure controls.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces the left ventricular diameter (LVEDD) in heart failure (HF) patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). The study compares structural and electrical remodeling in HF patients on CRT and matched HF controls without LBBB. METHODS: In 42 patients (64 +/- 9 years left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 25 +/- 8%, 16 coronary artery disease, 26 nonischemic cardiomyopathy, 21 with LBBB and CRT indication vs 21 controls [matched for gender, age, LVEF, and underlying disease]) an unpaced electrocardiogram (ECG) and echocardiogram were recorded at baseline (bl) and after 20.6 +/- 13.8 months (fup). LVEDD, left atrial (LA) width, mitral regurgitation (MR), P-wave, PR interval, QRS width, QRS vector, and QT interval were analyzed. RESULTS: LVEDD diminished with CRT (bl 68.7 +/- 10.3 vs fup 62.0 +/- 7.7 mm, P = 0.002). Controls showed no change (bl 64.1 +/- 9.4 vs fup 64.8 +/- 8.4 mm, P = n.s.). MR improved with CRT (bl 1.2 +/- 0.6 vs fup 0.8 +/- 0.7, P = 0.02), but not among controls. LA width tended to decrease on CRT (CRT bl 48.9 +/- 4.4 vs fup 46.9 +/- 7.2 mm, P = 0.17, controls bl 48.5 +/- 5.1 vs fup 47.5 +/- 6.5 mm, P = 0.49). PR interval lengthened in both groups (CRT bl 175 +/- 29 vs fup 188 +/- 30 ms, P = 0.03, controls bl 177+/-25 vs fup 187 +/- 19 ms, P = 0.27). QRS increased in both groups (CRT bl 165 +/- 22 vs fup 171 +/- 20 ms, P = 0.07, controls bl 111 +/- 17 vs fup 118 +/- 19 ms, P = 0.01). Analyses revealed no significant association of echocardiographic and ECG parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Despite LVEDD reduction with CRT, electrical activation does not recover. Electrical remodeling does not differ between LBBB patients under CRT and matched controls without CRT indication.

Baseline Doppler parameters are useful predictors of chronic left ventricular reduction in size by cardiac resynchronization therapy.

AIMS: The identification of responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and left bundle branch block (LBBB) remains difficult. We aimed to define the predictive value of conventional Doppler parameters. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 73 patients (65 +/- 9 years, 51 male, 36 ischaemic, 37 non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, QRS 167 +/- 31 ms, LVEF 23 +/- 6%) with LBBB, a CRT device was implanted. LV pre-ejection interval (PEI), interventricular mechanical delay (IVMD), LV filling time (FT), and myocardial performance index (MPI) were assessed at baseline and on optimized CRT. Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (EDD) was obtained at baseline and after 10.6 +/- 6.7 months. end-diastolic diameter diminished from 66.3 +/- 8.1 to 59.9 +/- 9.6 mm (P < 0.001). Initial LVPEI (r = 0.41, P < 0.001), baseline IVMD (r = 0.34, P = 0.003), acute LVPEI shortening (r = 0.33, P = 0.006), and baseline LVEDD (r = 0.32, P = 0.007) correlated with LVEDD reduction. An LVPEI > or =140 ms had a 82% accuracy to predict long-term LVEDD reduction (sensitivity 86%, specificity 67%, positive and negative predictive values 91 and 56%, respectively). Multivariate analysis solely revealed baseline LVPEI as predictor of LVEDD reduction. FT and MPI correlated only with their respective improvements. CONCLUSION: Left ventricular pre-ejection interval and IVMD predict favourable LV remodelling on CRT. The additional application of tissue Doppler parameters may further increase specificity and negative predictive value.

Optimization of cardiac resynchronization guided by Doppler echocardiography: haemodynamic improvement and intraindividual variability with different pacing configurations and atrioventricular delays.

AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves symptoms in heart failure patients with intraventricular conduction delay (IVCD). Different pacing modalities produce variable activation patterns and are likely to result in different haemodynamic changes. The objective of this study was to demonstrate acute haemodynamic changes with different CRT configurations. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 26 patients (left ventricular ejection fraction 22.7+/-6.1%, QRS 176+/-29 ms, New York Heart Association III/IV 18/8), a CRT device was implanted. An optimization procedure was performed including left (LVPEI) and right ventricular pre-ejection intervals, interventricular mechanical delay (IVD), left ventricular filling fraction (FTc), and myocardial performance index (MPI) during left and biventricular pacing with three different atrioventricular (AV) delays. An optimal mode and AV delay were defined. LVPEI changed from 166+/-27 to 139+/-25 ms, IVD from 49+/-19 to 6+/-18 ms, MPI from 0.98+/-0.25 to 0.62+/-0.22, and FTc from 0.42+/-0.08 to 0.51+/-0.08 (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The variability was 39+/-20 ms for LVPEI, 55+/-24 ms for IVD, 0.11+/-0.07 for FTc, and 0.35+/-0.18 for MPI. CONCLUSION: Optimized resynchronization in heart failure patients with IVCD produces marked acute improvement of the altered cardiac cycle timing. The variability of Doppler parameters with different CRT modalities underlines the necessity of individualized settings and suggests that the patients' benefit may be jeopardized without optimization.