Refine
Document Type
Conference Type
- Konferenz-Abstract (9)
- Konferenzartikel (2)
- Konferenz-Poster (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (14)
Keywords
- Differenz (1)
- Herzinsuffizienz (1)
- Isoglosse (1)
- Kardiale Resynchronisationstherapie (1)
- Metallorganisches Netzwerk (1)
- Sorption (1)
- Werkstoff (1)
Institute
Open Access
- Closed Access (10)
- Open Access (3)
- Closed (1)
In-vivo and in-vitro comparison of implant-based CRT optimization - What provide new algorithms?
(2011)
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 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.
Introduction: Patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) requires quantification of left ventricular conduction delay (LVCD). After implantation of biventricular pacing systems, individual AV delay (AVD) programming is essential to ensure hemodynamic response. To exclude adverse effects, AVD should exceed individual implant-related interatrial conduction times (IACT). As result of a pilot study, we proposed the development of a programmer-based transoesophageal left heart electrogram (LHE) recording to simplify both, LVCD and IACT measurement. This feature was implemented into the Biotronik ICS3000 programmer simultaneously with 3-channel surface ECG.
Methods: A 5F oesophageal electrode was perorally applied in 44 heart failure CRT-D patients (34m, 10f, 65±8 yrs., QRS=162±21ms). In position of maximum left ventricular deflection, oesophageal LVCD was measured between onsets of QRS in surface ECG and oesophageal left ventricular deflection. Then, in position of maximum left atrial deflection (LA), IACT in VDD operation (As-LA) was calculated by difference between programmed AV delay and the measured interval from onset of left atrial deflection to ventricular stimulus in the oesophageal electrogram. IACT in DDD operation (Ap-LA) was measured between atrial stimulus and LA..
Results: LVCD of the CRT patients was characterized by a minimum of 47ms with mean of 69±23ms. As-LA and Ap-LA were found to be 41±23ms and 125±25ms, resp., at mean. In 7 patients (15,9%), IACT measurement in DDD operation uncovered adverse AVD if left in factory settings. In this cases, Ap-LA exceeded the factory AVD. In 6 patients (13,6%), IACT in VDD operation was less than or equal 10ms indicating the need for short AVD.
Conclusion: Response to CRT requires distinct LVCD and AVD optimization. The ICS3000 oesophageal LHE feature can be utilized to measure LVCD in order to justify selection for CRT. IACT measurement simplifies AV delay optimization in patients with CRT systems irrespective of their make and model.
Introduction: To simplify AV delay (AVD) optimization in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), we reported that the hemodynamically optimal AVD for VDD and DDD mode CRT pacing can be approximated by individually measuring implant-related interatrial conduction intervals (IACT) in oesophageal electrogram (LAE) and adding about 50ms. The programmer-based St Jude QuickOpt algorithm is utilizing this finding. By automatically measuring IACT in VDD operation, it predicts the sensed AVD by adding either 30ms or 60ms. Paced AVD is strictly 50ms longer than sensed AVD. As consequence of those variations, several studies identified distinct inaccuracies of QuickOpt. Therefore, we aimed to seek for better approaches to automate AVD optimization.
Methods: In a study of 35 heart failure patients (27m, 8f, age: 67±8y) with Insync III Marquis CRT-D systems we recorded telemetric electrograms between left ventricular electrode and superior vena cava shock coil (LVtip/SVC = LVCE) simultaneously with LAE. By LVCE we measured intervals As-Pe in VDD and Ap-Pe in DDD operation between right atrial sense-event (As) or atrial stimulus (Ap), resp., and end of the atrial activity (Pe). As-Pe and Ap-Pe were compared with As-LA an Ap-LA in LAE, respectively.
Results: End of the left atrial activity in LVCE could clearly be recognized in 35/35 patients in VDD and 29/35 patients in DDD operation. We found mean intervals As-LA of 40.2±24.5ms and Ap-LA of 124.3±20.6ms. As-Pe was 94.8±24.1ms and Ap-Pe was 181.1±17.8ms. Analyzing the sums of As-LA + 50ms with duration of As-Pe and Ap-LA + 50ms with duration of Ap-Pe, the differences were 4.7±9.2ms and 4.2±8.6ms, resp., only. Thus, hemodynamically optimal timing of the ventricular stimulus can be triggered by automatically detecting Pe in LVCE.
Conclusion: Based on minimal deviations between LAE and LVCE approach, we proposed companies to utilize the LVCE in order to automate individual AVD optimization in CRT pacing.