OBJECTIVE: Suboptimal device programming is frequent in non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, the role of device optimization and the most appropriate technique are still unknown. The aim of our study was to analyse the effect of different CRT optimization techniques within a network meta-analysis.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL for studies comparing outcomes with empirical device settings or optimization using echocardiography, static algorithms or dynamic algorithms. Studies investigating the effect of optimization in non-responders were also analysed.
RESULTS: A total of 17 studies with 4346 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Of the treatments and outcomes examined, a significant difference was found only between dynamic algorithms and echocardiography, with the former leading to a higher echocardiographic response rate [odds ratio (OR): 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-3.35], lower heart failure hospitalization rate (OR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.99) and greater improvement in 6-minute walk test [mean difference (MD): 45.52 m, 95% credible interval (CrI) 3.91-82.44 m]. We found no significant difference between empirical settings, static algorithms and dynamic algorithms. Seven studies with 228 patients reported response rates after optimization in non-responders. Altogether, 34.3%-66.7% of initial non-responders showed improvement after optimization, depending on response criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: At the time of CRT implantation, dynamic algorithms may serve as a resource-friendly alternative to echocardiographic optimization, with similar or better mid-term outcomes. However, their superiority over empirical device settings needs to be investigated in further trials. For non-responders, CRT optimization should be considered, as the majority of patients experience improvement.

OBJECTIVE: Significant changes in tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and mitral regurgitation (MR) post-cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are increasingly recognized. However, uncertainty remains as to whether the risk of CIED-associated TR and MR differs with right ventricular pacing (RVP) via CIED with trans-tricuspid RV leads, compared with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), conduction system pacing (CSP), and leadless pacing (LP). The study aims to synthesize extant data on risk and prognosis of significant post-CIED TR and MR across pacing strategies.
RESULTS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases published until 31 October 2023. Significant post-CIED TR and MR were defined as ≥ moderate. Fifty-seven TR studies (n = 13 723 patients) and 90 MR studies (n = 14 387 patients) were included. For all CIED, the risk of post-CIED TR increased [pooled odds ratio (OR) = 2.46 and 95% CI = 1.88-3.22], while the risk of post-CIED MR reduced (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.58-0.94) after 12 and 6 months of median follow-up, respectively. Right ventricular pacing via CIED with trans-tricuspid RV leads was associated with increased risk of post-CIED TR (OR = 4.54, 95% CI = 3.14-6.57) and post-CIED MR (OR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.18-4.26). Binarily, CSP did not alter TR risk (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.13-1.02), but significantly reduced MR (OR = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.03-0.62). Cardiac resynchronization therapy did not significantly change TR risk (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.55-2.17), but significantly reduced MR with prevalence pre-CRT of 43%, decreasing post-CRT to 22% (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.40-0.61). There was no significant association of LP with post-CIED TR (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.83-1.59) or MR (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 0.72-2.39). Cardiac implantable electronic device-associated TR was independently predictive of all-cause mortality [pooled hazard ratio (HR) = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.40-1.90] after median of 53 months. Mitral regurgitation persisting post-CRT independently predicted all-cause mortality (HR = 2.00, 95% CI = 1.57-2.55) after 38 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, when possible, adoption of pacing strategies that avoid isolated trans-tricuspid RV leads may be beneficial in preventing incident or deteriorating atrioventricular valvular regurgitation and might reduce mortality.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) is an inflammatory condition that can present with heart failure (HF). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is known to improve clinical outcomes for patients with left bundle branch block in the general HF population. However, data about the outcomes of CRT in CS is limited.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2024 to identify studies that reported clinical outcomes following the use of CRT in patients with CS. Data for outcomes was extracted, pooled, and analyzed. OpenMetaAnalyst was used for pooling untransformed proportions along with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: Five studies with a total of 176 CS patients who received CRT were included. The pooled incidence for all-cause mortality was 7.6 % (95 % CI: -3 % to 18 %), for HF-related hospitalizations 23.2 % (95 % CI: 2 % to 43 %), and for major adverse cerebral and cardiovascular events 27 % (95 % CI: 8 % to 45 %) after a mean follow-up of 60.1 (±48.7) months. The pooled left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 34.28 % (95 % CI: 29.88 % to 38.68 %) demonstrating an improvement of 3.75 % in LVEF from baseline LVEF of 30.58 % (95 % CI: 24.68 % to 36.48 %). The mean New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class was 2.16 (95 % CI: 1.47 to 2.84) after CRT as compared to the baseline mean NYHA of 2.58 (95 % CI: 2.29 to 2.86).
CONCLUSIONS: Although improvements were observed in LVEF and mean NYHA, mortality was high in CS patients with CRT.

Non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) represents a significant cause of heart failure, defined as the presence of left ventricular (LV) dilatation and systolic dysfunction unexplained solely by abnormal loading conditions or coronary artery disease. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as a cornerstone in the management of heart failure, particularly in patients with DCM. However, identifying patients who will benefit the most from CRT remains challenging. Speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) has garnered attention as a non-invasive imaging modality that allows for the quantitative assessment of myocardial mechanics, offering insights into LV function beyond traditional echocardiographic parameters. This comprehensive review explores the role of STE in guiding patient selection and optimizing outcomes in CRT for DCM. By assessing parameters such as LV strain, strain rate, and dyssynchrony, STE enables a more precise evaluation of myocardial function and mechanical dyssynchrony, aiding in the identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from CRT. Furthermore, STE provides valuable prognostic information and facilitates post-CRT optimization by guiding lead placement and assessing response to therapy. Through an integration of STE with CRT, clinicians can enhance patient selection, improve procedural success rates, and ultimately, optimize clinical outcomes in patients with DCM. This review underscores the pivotal role of STE in advancing personalized management strategies for DCM patients undergoing CRT.

In the 2000s, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) became a revolutionary treatment for heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) and wide QRS. However, about one-third of CRT recipients do not show a favorable response. This review of the current literature aims to better define the concept of CRT response/nonresponse. The diagnosis of CRT nonresponder should be viewed as a continuum, and it cannot rely solely on a single parameter. Moreover, baseline features of some patients might predict an unfavorable response. A strong collaboration between heart failure specialists and electrophysiologists is key to overcoming this challenge with multiple strategies. In the contemporary era, new pacing modalities, such as His-bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing, represent a promising alternative to CRT. Observational studies have demonstrated their potential; however, several limitations should be addressed. Large randomized controlled trials are needed to prove their efficacy in HFrEF with electromechanical dyssynchrony.

OBJECTIVE: Significant changes in tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and mitral regurgitation (MR) post-cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are increasingly recognized. However, uncertainty remains as to whether the risk of CIED-associated TR and MR differs with right ventricular pacing (RVP) via CIED with trans-tricuspid RV leads, compared with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), conduction system pacing (CSP), and leadless pacing (LP). The study aims to synthesize extant data on risk and prognosis of significant post-CIED TR and MR across pacing strategies.
RESULTS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases published until 31 October 2023. Significant post-CIED TR and MR were defined as ≥ moderate. Fifty-seven TR studies (n = 13 723 patients) and 90 MR studies (n = 14 387 patients) were included. For all CIED, the risk of post-CIED TR increased [pooled odds ratio (OR) = 2.46 and 95% CI = 1.88-3.22], while the risk of post-CIED MR reduced (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.58-0.94) after 12 and 6 months of median follow-up, respectively. Right ventricular pacing via CIED with trans-tricuspid RV leads was associated with increased risk of post-CIED TR (OR = 4.54, 95% CI = 3.14-6.57) and post-CIED MR (OR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.18-4.26). Binarily, CSP did not alter TR risk (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.13-1.02), but significantly reduced MR (OR = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.03-0.62). Cardiac resynchronization therapy did not significantly change TR risk (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.55-2.17), but significantly reduced MR with prevalence pre-CRT of 43%, decreasing post-CRT to 22% (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.40-0.61). There was no significant association of LP with post-CIED TR (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.83-1.59) or MR (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 0.72-2.39). Cardiac implantable electronic device-associated TR was independently predictive of all-cause mortality [pooled hazard ratio (HR) = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.40-1.90] after median of 53 months. Mitral regurgitation persisting post-CRT independently predicted all-cause mortality (HR = 2.00, 95% CI = 1.57-2.55) after 38 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, when possible, adoption of pacing strategies that avoid isolated trans-tricuspid RV leads may be beneficial in preventing incident or deteriorating atrioventricular valvular regurgitation and might reduce mortality.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing is an alternative to biventricular pacing. In this study, we aim to summarize the available evidence on the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of left bundle branch block area pacing (LBBAP).
OBJECTIVE: The study summarizes the available evidence on the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of left bundle branch block area pacing (LBBAP).
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduced mortality and hospitalizations in heart failure (HF) patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% and concomitant LBBB. Recently LBBAP has been studied as a more physiological alternative to achieve CRT.
METHODS: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were performed to identify studies examining the role of LBBAP for CRT in heart failure. Comprehensive meta-analysis version 4 was used for meta-regression to examine variables that contribute to data heterogeneity.
RESULTS: Eighteen studies, 17 observational and one randomized controlled trial (RCT) were examined. A total of 3906 HF patients who underwent CRT (2036 LBBAP vs. 1870 biventricular pacing [BVP]) were included. LBBAP was performed successfully in 90.4% of patients. Compared to baseline, LBBAP was associated with a reduction in QRS duration (MD: -47.23  ms 95% confidence interval [CI]: -53.45, -41.01), an increase in LVEF (MD: 15.22%, 95% CI: 13.5, 16.94), and a reduction in NYHA class (MD: -1.23, 95% CI: -1.41, -1.05). Compared to BVP, LBBAP was associated with a significant reduction in QRS duration (MD: -20.69 ms, 95% CI: -25.49, -15.88) and improvement in LVEF (MD: 4.78%, 95% CI: 3.30, 6.10). Furthermore, LBBAP was associated with a significant reduction in HF hospitalization (odds ratio [OR]: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.34, 0.56) and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.86) compared to BVP.
CONCLUSIONS: LBBAP was associated with improved ventricular electrical synchrony compared to BVP, as well as better echocardiographic and clinical outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: The aim is to discuss efficacy and safety of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes in participants with implantable cardiac devices compared with usual care.
UNASSIGNED: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched from inspection till July 15, 2022. Randomized controlled trials were included if they enrolled adult participants with implantable cardiac devices and tested exercise-based CR interventions in comparison with any control. Risk of bias was assessed, and endpoints data were pooled using random-effects model.
UNASSIGNED: Sixteen randomized trials enrolling 2053 participants were included. Study interventions differed between studies in terms of programme components, setting, exercise intensity, and follow-up. All studies included physical exercise component. In both implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) groups, exercise training in CR programmes improved peak oxygen uptake (VO2) [(mean difference (MD) 2.08 ml/kg/min; 95 % CI: 1.44-2.728, p < 0.0001; I2 = 99 %) and (MD 2.24 ml/kg/min; 95 % CI: 1.43-3.04, p < 0.0001; I2 = 96 %), respectively] and 6-min walk test in ICD group (MD 41.51 m; 95 % CI: 15.19-67.82 m, p = 0.002; I2 = 95 %) compared with usual care. In CRT group, there was no statistically significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction change between comparison groups. The results were consistent in subgroup analysis according to high or low-to-moderate exercise intensity for change in peak VO2 and ejection fraction in CRT group. There was no difference in number of ICD shocks between the comparators.
UNASSIGNED: Exercise-based CR programmes appear to be safe when enrolling participants with implantable cardiac devices and leading to favourable functional outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) can evaluate myocardial scar associated with a higher risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD), which can guide the selection between cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without a defibrillator (CRT-P/CRT-D). Our aim was to investigate the association between LGE and SCD risk in patients with CRT using the LGE-CMR technique.
RESULTS: We performed a systematic literature search using four databases. The target population was CRT candidates. The primary endpoint was SCD. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool. Fifteen eligible articles were included with a total of 2494 patients, of whom 27%, 56%, and 19% had an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), CRT-D, and CRT-P, respectively. Altogether, 54.71% of the cohort was LGE positive, who had a 72% higher risk for SCD (HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.18-2.50) compared to LGE negatives. In non-ischemic patients, the proportion of LGE positivity was 46.6%, with a significantly higher risk for SCD as compared to LGE negatives (HR 2.42; 95% CI 1.99-2.94). The subgroup of CRT-only patients showed no difference between the LGE-positive vs. negative candidates (HR 1.17; 95% CI 0.82-1.68). Comparable SCD risk was observed between articles with short- (OR 7.47; 95% CI 0.54-103.12) vs. long-term (OR 6.15; 95% CI 0.96-39.45) follow-up time.
CONCLUSIONS: LGE-CMR positivity was associated with an increased SCD risk; however, in CRT candidates, the difference in risk reduction between LGE positive vs. negative patients was statistically not significant, suggesting a role of reverse remodeling. LGE-CMR before device implantation could be crucial in identifying high-risk patients even in non-ischemic etiology.

Traditional right ventricular pacing (RVP) has been linked to the deterioration of both left ventricular diastolic and systolic function. This worsening often culminates in elevated rates of hospitalization due to heart failure, an increased risk of atrial fibrillation, and increased morbidity. While biventricular pacing (BVP) has demonstrated clinical and echocardiographic improvements in patients afflicted with heart failure and left bundle branch block, it has also encountered significant challenges such as a notable portion of non-responders and procedural failures attributed to anatomical complexities. In recent times, the interest has shifted towards conduction system pacing, initially, His bundle pacing, and more recently, left bundle branch area pacing, which are seen as promising alternatives to established methods. In contrast to other approaches, conduction system pacing offers the advantage of fostering more physiological and harmonized ventricular activation by directly stimulating the His-Purkinje network. This direct pacing results in a more synchronized systolic and diastolic function of the left ventricle compared with RVP and BVP. Of particular note is the capacity of conduction system pacing to yield a shorter QRS, conserve left ventricular ejection fraction, and reduce rates of mitral and tricuspid regurgitation when compared with RVP. The efficacy of conduction system pacing has also been found to have better clinical and echocardiographic improvement than BVP in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization. This review will delve into myocardial function in conduction system pacing compared with that in RVP and BVP.