Department of Medicine, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington.
Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
JAMA Cardiol. 2023 Mar 1;8(3):213-221. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2022.5320.
Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with a pacemaker may benefit from a higher, more physiologic backup heart rate than the nominal 60 beats per minute (bpm) setting.
To assess the effects of a moderately accelerated personalized backup heart rate compared with 60 bpm (usual care) in patients with preexisting pacemaker systems that limit pacemaker-mediated dyssynchrony.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This blinded randomized clinical trial enrolled patients with stage B and C HFpEF from the University of Vermont Medical Center pacemaker clinic between June 2019 and November 2020. Analysis was modified intention to treat.
Participants were randomly assigned to personalized accelerated pacing or usual care and were followed up for 1 year. The personalized accelerated pacing heart rate was calculated using a resting heart rate algorithm based on height and modified by ejection fraction.
The primary outcome was the serial change in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score. Secondary end points were changes in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, pacemaker-detected physical activity, atrial fibrillation from baseline, and adverse clinical events.
Overall, 107 participants were randomly assigned to the personalized accelerated pacing (n = 50) or usual care (n = 57) groups. The median (IQR) age was 75 (69-81) years, and 48 (48%) were female. Over 1-year follow-up, the median (IQR) pacemaker-detected heart rate was 75 (75-80) bpm in the personalized accelerated pacing arm and 65 (63-68) bpm in usual care. MLHFQ scores improved in the personalized accelerated pacing group (median [IQR] baseline MLHFQ score, 26 [8-45]; at 1 month, 15 [2-25]; at 1 year, 9 [4-21]; P < .001) and worsened with usual care (median [IQR] baseline MLHFQ score, 19 [6-42]; at 1 month, 23 [5-39]; at 1 year, 27 [7-52]; P = .03). In addition, personalized accelerated pacing led to improved changes in NT-proBNP levels (mean [SD] decrease of 109 [498] pg/dL vs increase of 128 [537] pg/dL with usual care; P = .02), activity levels (mean [SD], +47 [67] minutes per day vs -22 [35] minutes per day with usual care; P < .001), and device-detected atrial fibrillation (27% relative risk reduction compared with usual care; P = .04) over 1-year of follow-up. Adverse clinical events occurred in 4 patients in the personalized accelerated pacing group and 11 patients in usual care.
In this study, among patients with HFpEF and pacemakers, treatment with a moderately accelerated, personalized pacing rate was safe and improved quality of life, NT-proBNP levels, physical activity, and atrial fibrillation compared with the usual 60 bpm setting.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04721314.
对于伴有射血分数保留的心力衰竭(HFpEF)且装有起搏器的患者,较高的、更符合生理的后备心率(比名义上的 60 次/分钟(bpm)设置更高)可能对其有益。
评估与 60 bpm(常规护理)相比,中度加速的个性化后备心率在限制起搏器介导的不同步的现有起搏器系统的患者中的效果。
设计、地点和参与者:这项盲法随机临床试验纳入了 2019 年 6 月至 2020 年 11 月期间在佛蒙特大学医疗中心起搏器诊所就诊的 HFpEF 期 B 和 C 的患者。分析采用修改后的意向治疗。
参与者被随机分配到个性化加速起搏或常规护理组,并随访 1 年。个性化加速起搏心率是根据身高使用静息心率算法计算的,并通过射血分数进行修正。
主要结果是明尼苏达州心力衰竭生活质量问卷(MLHFQ)评分的连续变化。次要终点是 N-末端脑钠肽前体(NT-proBNP)水平的变化、起搏器检测到的体力活动、从基线开始的心房颤动以及不良临床事件。
共有 107 名参与者被随机分配到个性化加速起搏(n=50)或常规护理(n=57)组。中位(IQR)年龄为 75(69-81)岁,48 名(48%)为女性。在 1 年的随访中,个性化加速起搏组的中位(IQR)起搏器检测心率为 75(75-80)bpm,常规护理组为 65(63-68)bpm。个性化加速起搏组的 MLHFQ 评分改善(中位数[IQR]基线 MLHFQ 评分,26[8-45];1 个月时,15[2-25];1 年时,9[4-21];P<0.001),而常规护理组则恶化(中位数[IQR]基线 MLHFQ 评分,19[6-42];1 个月时,23[5-39];1 年时,27[7-52];P=0.03)。此外,个性化加速起搏还导致 NT-proBNP 水平的变化改善(平均[标准差]减少 109[498]pg/dL,而常规护理组增加 128[537]pg/dL;P=0.02)、活动水平(平均[标准差],+47[67]分钟/天与常规护理组的-22[35]分钟/天;P<0.001)以及设备检测到的心房颤动(与常规护理相比,相对风险降低 27%;P=0.04),随访 1 年。个性化加速起搏组有 4 例患者和常规护理组有 11 例患者发生不良临床事件。
在这项研究中,在伴有 HFpEF 和起搏器的患者中,与常规的 60 bpm 相比,中度加速的个性化起搏率治疗是安全的,并改善了生活质量、NT-proBNP 水平、体力活动和心房颤动。
ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT04721314。