Atrioventricular Optimization Improves Cardiac Resynchronization Response in Patients with Long Interventricular Electrical Delays: A Pooled Analysis of the SMART-AV and SMART-CRT Trials.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy atrioventricular optimization electrical delay heart failure

Journal

Heart rhythm
ISSN: 1556-3871
Titre abrégé: Heart Rhythm
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101200317

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 Mar 2024
Historique:
received: 07 03 2024
revised: 21 03 2024
accepted: 24 03 2024
medline: 12 4 2024
pubmed: 12 4 2024
entrez: 11 4 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The utility of atrioventricular (AV) optimization (AVO) algorithms remains in question. A substudy of the SMART-AV trial found patients with prolonged interventricular (RV-LV) delays ≥70 ms were more likely to benefit from CRT with AVO. The SMART-CRT trial evaluated AVO based on these results, but the study was underpowered. To increase statistical power, data from SMART-AV patients meeting the inclusion criteria of RV-LV ≥70 ms were pooled with data from SMART-CRT to reassess AVO. SMART-CRT and SMART-AV were prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trials. Patients in both studies were randomized to be programmed with an AVO algorithm (SmartDelay) or fixed AV delay (120 ms). Paired echocardiograms obtained at baseline and six months were compared, with CRT response defined as ≥15% reduction in left ventricle end systolic volume (LVESV). A total of 451 complete patient datasets were pooled and analyzed. The baseline demographics between studies did not differ statistically in terms of age, sex, LV ejection fraction, or LVESV. The AVO group had a greater proportion of CRT responders (SmartDelay: 73.9%, Fixed: 63.1%, p=0.014) and greater changes in measures of reverse remodeling. SmartDelay patients with a recommended sensed AV delay outside the nominal range (100-120 ms) had 2.3 greater odds of CRT response than fixed AV delay patients. Greater CRT response and measures of reverse remodeling were observed in patients with SmartDelay enabled versus a fixed AV delay. The present study supports the use of SmartDelay in patients with a CRT indication and interventricular delay ≥70 ms. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00677014 and NCT03089281.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The utility of atrioventricular (AV) optimization (AVO) algorithms remains in question. A substudy of the SMART-AV trial found patients with prolonged interventricular (RV-LV) delays ≥70 ms were more likely to benefit from CRT with AVO. The SMART-CRT trial evaluated AVO based on these results, but the study was underpowered.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To increase statistical power, data from SMART-AV patients meeting the inclusion criteria of RV-LV ≥70 ms were pooled with data from SMART-CRT to reassess AVO.
METHODS METHODS
SMART-CRT and SMART-AV were prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trials. Patients in both studies were randomized to be programmed with an AVO algorithm (SmartDelay) or fixed AV delay (120 ms). Paired echocardiograms obtained at baseline and six months were compared, with CRT response defined as ≥15% reduction in left ventricle end systolic volume (LVESV).
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 451 complete patient datasets were pooled and analyzed. The baseline demographics between studies did not differ statistically in terms of age, sex, LV ejection fraction, or LVESV. The AVO group had a greater proportion of CRT responders (SmartDelay: 73.9%, Fixed: 63.1%, p=0.014) and greater changes in measures of reverse remodeling. SmartDelay patients with a recommended sensed AV delay outside the nominal range (100-120 ms) had 2.3 greater odds of CRT response than fixed AV delay patients.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Greater CRT response and measures of reverse remodeling were observed in patients with SmartDelay enabled versus a fixed AV delay. The present study supports the use of SmartDelay in patients with a CRT indication and interventricular delay ≥70 ms.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00677014 and NCT03089281.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38604592
pii: S1547-5271(24)02277-X
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.03.1783
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03089281', 'NCT00677014']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Auteurs

Michael R Gold (MR)

Medical University South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States. Electronic address: Goldmr@musc.edu.

Angelo Auricchio (A)

Fondazione Cardiocentro Ticino, Lugano, Switzerland.

Christophe Leclercq (C)

CHRU Hopital Pontchaillou, Rennes Cedex 9, France.

Nicholas Wold (N)

Boston Scientific Corporation, Saint Paul, MN, United States.

Kenneth M Stein (KM)

Boston Scientific Corporation, Saint Paul, MN, United States.

Kenneth A Ellenbogen (KA)

VCU School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, United States.

Classifications MeSH