Volltext-Downloads (blau) und Frontdoor-Views (grau)

In-vivo and in-vitro comparison of implant-based CRT optimization - What provide new algorithms?

  • Introduction: In cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), individual AV delay (AVD) optimization can effectively increase hemodynamics and reduce non-responder rate. Accurate, automatic and easily comprehensible algorithms for the follow-up are desirable. QuickOpt is the first attempt of a semi-automatic intracardiac electrogram (IEGM) based AVD algorithm. We aimed to compare its accuracy andIntroduction: In cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), individual AV delay (AVD) optimization can effectively increase hemodynamics and reduce non-responder rate. Accurate, automatic and easily comprehensible algorithms for the follow-up are desirable. QuickOpt is the first attempt of a semi-automatic intracardiac electrogram (IEGM) based AVD algorithm. We aimed to compare its accuracy and usefulness by in-vitro and in-vivo studies. Methods: Using the programmable ARSI-4 four-chamber heart rhythm and IEGM simulator (HKP, Germany), the QuickOpt feature of an Epic HF system (St. Jude, USA) was tested in-vitro by simulated atrial IEGM amplitudes between 0.3 and 3.5mV during both, manual and automatic atrial sensing between 0.2 and 1.0mV. Subsequently, in 21 heart failure patients with implanted biventricular defibrillators, QuickOpt was performed in-vivo. Results of the algorithm for VDD and DDD stimulation were compared with echo AV delay optimization. Results: In-vitro simulations demonstrated a QuickOpt measuring accuracy of ± 8ms. Depending on atrial IEGM amplitude, the algorithm proposed optimal AVD between 90 and 150ms for VDD and between 140 and 200ms for DDD operation, respectively. In-vivo, QuickOpt difference between individual AVD in DDD and VDD mode was either 50ms (20pts) or 40ms (1pt). QuickOpt and echo AVD differed by 41 ± 25ms (7 – 90ms) in VDD and by 18 ± 24ms (17-50ms) in DDD operation. Individual echo AVD difference between both modes was 73 ± 20ms (30-100ms). Conclusion: The study demonstrates the value of in-vitro studies. It predicted QuickOpt deficiencies regarding IEGM amplitude dependent AVD proposals constrained to fixed individual differences between DDD and VDD mode. Consequently, in-vivo, the algorithm provided AVD of predominantly longer duration than echo in both modes. Accepting echo individualization as gold standard, QuickOpt should not be used alone to optimize AVD in CRT patients.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar

Statistics

frontdoor_oas
Metadaten
Author:Björn Riedel, Matthias HeinkeGND, Frank Weber, Christoph A. Nienaber, Bruno IsmerGND
Publisher:Walter de Gruyter
Place of publication:Berlin, Boston
Date of Publication (online):2011/09/30
Pagenumber:1
Language:English
Parent Title (Multiple languages):Biomedical Engineering / Biomedizinische Technik
Volume:56
Issue:S1
ISSN:0013-5585 (Print)
ISSN:1862-278X (Online)
First Page:5
Document Type:Conference Proceeding
Institutes:Hochschule Offenburg / Bibliografie
Release Date:2020/03/05
Licence (German):License LogoEs gilt das UrhG
Note:
Proceedings BMT 2011, 45. DGBMT Jahrestagung, Freiburg, 27.-30. September 2011
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt.2011.856