Department of Cardiology, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium; School of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Department of Cardiology, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium.
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Apr;13(4):895-906. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.04.022. Epub 2019 Jul 17.
This study assessed the impact of right-atrial (RA) pacing on left-atrial (LA) physiology and clinical outcome.
Data for the effects of RA pacing on LA synchronicity, function, and structure after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are scarce.
The effect of RA pacing on LA function, morphology, and synchronicity was assessed in a prospective imaging cohort of heart failure (HF) patients in sinus rhythm with a guideline-based indication for CRT. Additionally, in a retrospective outcome cohort of consecutive HF patients undergoing CRT implantation, the relationship to RA pacing was assessed using various outcome endpoints. High versus low atrial pacing burden was defined as atrial pacing above or below 50% in both cohorts.
A total of 36 patients were included in the imaging cohort (68 ± 11 years of age). Six months after CRT, patients with high RA pacing burden showed less improvement in LA maximum and minimum volumes and total emptying fraction (p < 0.05). Peak atrial longitudinal strain and reservoir and booster strain rates but not conduit strain rate improved after CRT in patients with low RA pacing burden but worsened in patients with high RA pacing burden (p < 0.05 for all). A high RA pacing burden induced significant intra-atrial dyssynchrony (maximum opposing wall delay: 44 ± 13 ms vs. 97 ± 17 ms, respectively; p = 0.022). A total of 569 patients were included in the outcome cohort. After covariate adjustments were made, a high RA pacing burden was associated with reduced LV reverse remodeling (β = 8.738; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.101 to 14.374; p = 0.002) and new-onset or recurrent atrial fibrillation (41% vs. 22%, respectively, at a median of 31 months [range 22 to 44 months follow-up]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in time to first HF hospitalization or all-cause mortality (p = 0.185) after covariate adjustment. However, in a recurrent event analysis, HF readmissions were more common in patients exposed to a high RA pacing burden (p = 0.003).
RA pacing in CRT patients negatively influences LA morphology, function, and synchronicity, which is associated with worse clinical outcome, including diminished LV reverse remodeling, increased risk for new-onset or recurrent AF and heart failure readmission. Strategies reducing RA pacing burden may be warranted.
本研究旨在评估右心房(RA)起搏对左心房(LA)生理学和临床结局的影响。
关于 RA 起搏对心脏再同步治疗(CRT)后 LA 同步性、功能和结构影响的数据较少。
对窦性心律、基于指南的 CRT 适应证的心力衰竭(HF)患者进行前瞻性影像学队列研究,评估 RA 起搏对 LA 功能、形态和同步性的影响。此外,在接受 CRT 植入的连续 HF 患者的回顾性结果队列中,使用各种结果终点评估与 RA 起搏的关系。高 RA 起搏负荷定义为两个队列中均高于或低于 50%的心房起搏。
共纳入 36 例影像学队列患者(年龄 68 ± 11 岁)。CRT 后 6 个月,高 RA 起搏负荷组的 LA 最大和最小容积及总排空分数改善较小(p < 0.05)。低 RA 起搏负荷组的 LA 峰值纵向应变、储器和增强应变率以及 LA 传导应变率改善,而高 RA 起搏负荷组则恶化(所有 p < 0.05)。高 RA 起搏负荷可导致明显的房内不同步(最大相反壁延迟:分别为 44 ± 13 ms 和 97 ± 17 ms;p = 0.022)。结果队列共纳入 569 例患者。调整协变量后,高 RA 起搏负荷与 LV 反向重构减少相关(β = 8.738;95%置信区间[CI]:3.101 至 14.374;p = 0.002),新发或复发性心房颤动的风险增加(分别为 41%和 22%,中位随访时间为 31 个月[范围 22 至 44 个月];p < 0.001)。调整协变量后,首次 HF 住院或全因死亡率无差异(p = 0.185)。然而,在复发性事件分析中,高 RA 起搏负荷组 HF 再入院更为常见(p = 0.003)。
CRT 患者的 RA 起搏会对 LA 形态、功能和同步性产生负面影响,这与更差的临床结局相关,包括 LV 反向重构减少、新发或复发性 AF 和 HF 再入院风险增加。可能需要采取减少 RA 起搏负荷的策略。