Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence

BACKGROUND: The AdaptivCRT (aCRT) algorithm continuously adjusts cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) according to intrinsic atrioventricular conduction, providing synchronized left ventricular pacing in patients with normal PR interval and adaptive BiV pacing in patients with prolonged PR interv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Jagmeet P., Cha, Yong‐Mei, Lunati, Maurizio, Chung, Eugene S., Li, Shelby, Smeets, Pascal, O'Donnell, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7187461/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32009263
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.14376
_version_ 1783527180427329536
author Singh, Jagmeet P.
Cha, Yong‐Mei
Lunati, Maurizio
Chung, Eugene S.
Li, Shelby
Smeets, Pascal
O'Donnell, David
author_facet Singh, Jagmeet P.
Cha, Yong‐Mei
Lunati, Maurizio
Chung, Eugene S.
Li, Shelby
Smeets, Pascal
O'Donnell, David
author_sort Singh, Jagmeet P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The AdaptivCRT (aCRT) algorithm continuously adjusts cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) according to intrinsic atrioventricular conduction, providing synchronized left ventricular pacing in patients with normal PR interval and adaptive BiV pacing in patients with prolonged PR interval. Previous analyses demonstrated an association between aCRT and clinical benefit. We evaluated the incidence of patient mortality and atrial fibrillation (AF) with aCRT compared with standard CRT in a real‐world population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients enrolled in the Medtronic Personalized CRT Registry and implanted with a CRT from 2013‐2018 were divided into aCRT ON or standard CRT groups based upon device‐stored data. A Frailty survival model was used to evaluate the potential survival benefit of aCRT, accounting for patient heterogeneity and center variability. Daily AF burden and first device‐detected AF episodes of various durations were recorded by the device during follow‐up. A total of 1814 CRT patients with no reported long‐standing AF history at implant were included. Mean follow‐up time was 26.1 ± 16.5 months and 1162 patients (64.1%) had aCRT ON. Patient survival probability at 36 months was 88.3% for aCRT ON and 83.7% for standard CRT (covariate‐adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53‐0.96, P = .028). Mean AF burden during follow‐up was consistently lower in aCRT ON patients compared with standard CRT. At 36 months, the probability of AF was lower in patients with aCRT ON, regardless of which AF definition threshold was applied (6 minutes‐30 days, all P < .001). CONCLUSION: Use of the AdaptivCRT algorithm was associated with improved patient survival and lower incidence of AF in a real‐world, prospective, nonrandomized registry.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7187461
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71874612020-04-29 Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence Singh, Jagmeet P. Cha, Yong‐Mei Lunati, Maurizio Chung, Eugene S. Li, Shelby Smeets, Pascal O'Donnell, David J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Original Articles BACKGROUND: The AdaptivCRT (aCRT) algorithm continuously adjusts cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) according to intrinsic atrioventricular conduction, providing synchronized left ventricular pacing in patients with normal PR interval and adaptive BiV pacing in patients with prolonged PR interval. Previous analyses demonstrated an association between aCRT and clinical benefit. We evaluated the incidence of patient mortality and atrial fibrillation (AF) with aCRT compared with standard CRT in a real‐world population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients enrolled in the Medtronic Personalized CRT Registry and implanted with a CRT from 2013‐2018 were divided into aCRT ON or standard CRT groups based upon device‐stored data. A Frailty survival model was used to evaluate the potential survival benefit of aCRT, accounting for patient heterogeneity and center variability. Daily AF burden and first device‐detected AF episodes of various durations were recorded by the device during follow‐up. A total of 1814 CRT patients with no reported long‐standing AF history at implant were included. Mean follow‐up time was 26.1 ± 16.5 months and 1162 patients (64.1%) had aCRT ON. Patient survival probability at 36 months was 88.3% for aCRT ON and 83.7% for standard CRT (covariate‐adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53‐0.96, P = .028). Mean AF burden during follow‐up was consistently lower in aCRT ON patients compared with standard CRT. At 36 months, the probability of AF was lower in patients with aCRT ON, regardless of which AF definition threshold was applied (6 minutes‐30 days, all P < .001). CONCLUSION: Use of the AdaptivCRT algorithm was associated with improved patient survival and lower incidence of AF in a real‐world, prospective, nonrandomized registry. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-02-28 2020-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7187461/ /pubmed/32009263 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.14376 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Singh, Jagmeet P.
Cha, Yong‐Mei
Lunati, Maurizio
Chung, Eugene S.
Li, Shelby
Smeets, Pascal
O'Donnell, David
Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
title Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
title_full Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
title_fullStr Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
title_full_unstemmed Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
title_short Real‐world behavior of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm on patient outcomes: Effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
title_sort real‐world behavior of crt pacing using the adaptivcrt algorithm on patient outcomes: effect on mortality and atrial fibrillation incidence
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7187461/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32009263
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jce.14376
work_keys_str_mv AT singhjagmeetp realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence
AT chayongmei realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence
AT lunatimaurizio realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence
AT chungeugenes realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence
AT lishelby realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence
AT smeetspascal realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence
AT odonnelldavid realworldbehaviorofcrtpacingusingtheadaptivcrtalgorithmonpatientoutcomeseffectonmortalityandatrialfibrillationincidence