INTRODUCTION: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an effective treatment that reduces mortality and improves cardiac function in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB). However, about 30% of patients passing the current criteria do not benefit or benefit only a little from CRT. Three predictors of benefit based on different ECG properties were compared: 1) "strict" left bundle branch block classification (SLBBB); 2) QRS area; 3) ventricular electrical delay (VED) which defines the septal-lateral conduction delay. These predictors have never been analyzed concurrently. We analyzed the relationship between them on a subset of 602 records from the MADIT-CRT trial. METHODS & RESULTS: SLBBB classification was performed by two experts; QRS area and VED were computed fully automatically. High-frequency QRS (HFQRS) maps were used to inspect conduction abnormalities. The correlation between SLBBB and other predictors was R = 0.613, 0.523 and 0.390 for VED, QRS area in Z lead, and QRS duration, respectively. Scatter plots were used to pick up disagreement between the predictors. The majority of SLBBB subjects- 295 of 330 (89%)-are supposed to respond positively to CRT according to the VED and QRS area, though 93 of 272 (34%) non-SLBBB should also benefit from CRT according to the VED and QRS area. CONCLUSION: SLBBB classification is limited by the proper setting of cut-off values. In addition, it is too "strict" and excludes patients that may benefit from CRT therapy. QRS area and VED are clearly defined parameters. They may be used to optimize biventricular stimulation. Detailed analysis of conduction irregularities with CRT optimization should be based on HFQRS maps.

Institute of Scientific Instruments of the Czech Academy of Sciences Brno Czech Republic

International Clinical Research Center St Anne's University Hospital Brno Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Brignole M, Auricchio A, Baron-Esquivias G, Bordachar P, Boriani G, Breithardt OA, et al. 213 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur Heart J 2013;34:2281–329. 10.1093/eurheartj/eht150 PubMed DOI

Engels EB, Mafi-Rad M, van Stipdonk AMW, Vernooy K, Prinzen FW. Why QRS Duration Should Be Replaced by Better Measures of Electrical Activation to Improve Patient Selection for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy. J Cardiovasc Transl Res 2016;9:257–65. 10.1007/s12265-016-9693-1 PubMed DOI PMC

Strauss DG, Selvester RH, Wagner GS. Defining left bundle branch block in the era of cardiac resynchronization therapy. Am J Cardiol 2011;107:927–34. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.11.010 PubMed DOI

Zusterzeel R, Vicente J, Ochoa-Jimenez R, Zhu J, Couderc JP, Akinnagbe-Zusterzeel E, et al. The 43rd International Society for Computerized Electrocardiology ECG initiative for the automated detection of strict left bundle branch block. J Electrocardiol 2018:6–11. 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2018.08.001 PubMed DOI

Van Deursen CJM, Vernooy K, Dudink E, Bergfeldt L, Crijns HJGM, Prinzen FW, et al. Vectorcardiographic QRS area as a novel predictor of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Electrocardiol 2015;48:45–52. 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2014.10.003 PubMed DOI

Nguyên UC, Claridge S, Vernooy K, Engels EB, Razavi R, Rinaldi CA, et al. Relationship between vectorcardiographic QRSarea, myocardial scar quantification, and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. J Electrocardiol 2018; 51:457–63. 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2018.01.009 PubMed DOI

De Pooter J, El Haddad M, De Buyzere M, Aranda HA, Cornelussen R, Stegemann B, et al. Biventricular Paced QRS Area Predicts Acute Hemodynamic CRT Response Better Than QRS Duration or QRS Amplitudes. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2017;28:192–200. 10.1111/jce.13132 PubMed DOI

Jurak P, Halamek J, Meluzin J, Plesinger F, Postranecka T, Lipoldova J, et al. Ventricular dyssynchrony assessment using ultra-high frequency ECG technique. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2017;49:245–54. 10.1007/s10840-017-0268-0 PubMed DOI PMC

Plesinger F, Jurak P, Halamek J, Nejedly P, Leinveber P, Viscor I, et al. Ventricular Electrical Delay Measured From Body Surface ECGs Is Associated With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response in Left Bundle Branch Block Patients From the MADIT-CRT Trial (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation-Cardiac Resynchroniz. Circ Arrhythmia Electrophysiol 2018;11:e005719 10.1161/CIRCEP.117.005719 PubMed DOI

Padeletti L, Sassone B, Tondo AL, Belvito C. Electrocardiographic Criteria of True Left Bundle Branch Block: A Simple Sign to Predict a Better Clinical and Instrumental Response to CRT n.d. 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2012.03427.x PubMed DOI

Smisek R, Jurak P, Viscor I, Halamek J, Plesinger F, Matejkova M, et al. Automatic detection of strict left bundle branch block. IFMBE Proc 2018;68:435–9. 10.1007/978-981-10-9038-7_82 PubMed DOI

Moss AJ, Brown MW, Cannom DS, Daubert JP, Estes M, Foster E, et al. Trial—Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT): Design and Clinical Protocol. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 2005;10:34–43. PubMed PMC

Guidelines for the LBBB Initiative of the ISCE 2018 meeting. http://thew-project.org/LBBB_initiative.htm

Vozda M, Cerny M. Methods for derivation of orthogonal leads from 12-lead electrocardiogram: A review. Biomed Signal Process Control 2015;19:23–34. 10.1016/j.bspc.2015.03.001 DOI

Plesinger F, Jurco J, Halamek J, Jurak P. SignalPlant: An open signal processing software platform. Physiol Meas 2016;37:N38–48. 10.1088/0967-3334/37/7/N38 PubMed DOI

THEW database: http://thew-project.org/Database/E-OTH-12-0602-024.html.

Caputo ML, van Stipdonk A, Illner A, D’Ambrosio G, Regoli F, Conte G, et al. The definition of left bundle branch block influences the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy. Int J Cardiol 2018;269:165–9. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.07.060 PubMed DOI

Anderson KP. Left bundle branch block and the evolving role of QRS morphology in selection of patients for cardiac resynchronization. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2018;52:353–74. 10.1007/s10840-018-0426-z PubMed DOI

Bertaglia E, Migliore F, Baritussio A, De Simone A, Reggiani A, Pecora D, et al. Stricter criteria for left bundle branch block diagnosis do not improve response to CRT. PACE—Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2017;40:850–6. 10.1111/pace.13104 PubMed DOI

Van Stipdonk AMW, Vanbelle S, Horst IAH, Luermans JG, Meine M. Large variability in clinical judgement and definitions of left bundle branch block to identify candidates for cardiac resynchronisation therapy Int J Cardiol. 2019. January 15 10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.01.051 PubMed DOI

Maass AH, Vernooy K, Wijers SC, Van Sant J, Cramer MJ, Meine M, et al. Refining success of cardiac resynchronization therapy using a simple score predicting the amount of reverse ventricular remodelling: results from the Markers and Response to CRT (MARC) study 2018:1–10. 10.1093/europace/euw445 PubMed DOI

Strik M, Ploux S, Huntjens PR, Châu U, Frontera A, Eschalier R, et al. Response to cardiac resynchronization therapy is determined by intrinsic electrical substrate rather than by its modification. Int J Cardiol 2018;270:143–8. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.06.005 PubMed DOI

Niederer SA, Rinaldi CA. Is CRT response rate all about patient selection? Int J Cardiol 2018;270:183–4. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.06.079 PubMed DOI

Auricchio A, Lumens J, Prinzen FW. Controversies in Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology Does Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Benefit Patients With Right Bundle Branch Block 2014:532–42. PubMed

Coppola G, Ciaramitaro G, Stabile G, Donofrio A, Palmisano P, Carità P, et al. Magnitude of QRS duration reduction after biventricular pacing identifies responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy. Int J Cardiol 2016;221:450–5. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.06.203 PubMed DOI

Arrhythmia C, Zweerink A, Van De Ven P, Biesbroek PS, Allaart CP. Normalization of QRS Duration to Left Ventricular Dimension 2018. 10.1161/CIRCEP.118.006767 PubMed DOI

Gold MR, Yu Y, Wold N, Day JD. The role of interventricular conduction delay to predict clinical response with cardiac resynchronization therapy. Hear Rhythm 2017;14:1748–55. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.10.016 PubMed DOI

Gold MR, Lowy J, Tomassoni G, Auricchio A, Rials SJ, Leclercq C, et al. The rationale and design of the SMART CRT trial n.d. 10.1111/pace.13459 PubMed DOI

Birgersdotter U, Wold N, Ellenbogen KA. Effect of Interventricular Electrical Delay on Atrioventricular Optimization for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy 2018:1–9. 10.1161/CIRCEP.117.006055 PubMed DOI PMC

Van Eyk JE, Gold MR, Mittal S, Stein KM, Ellenbogen KA, Smart-av T. Development of a biomarker panel to predict cardiac resynchronization therapy response: Results from the SMART-AV trial. Hear Rhythm 2019. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.11.026 PubMed DOI PMC

Hussein AA, Ceresnak SR, Davis DR, Park DS, Wang PJ. Year in Review in Cardiac Electrophysiology 2019:1–13. 10.1161/CIRCEP.118.007142 PubMed DOI

Carità P, Corrado E, Pontone G, Curnis A, Bontempi L, Novo G, et al. Non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy: Insights from multimodality imaging and electrocardiography. A brief review. Int J Cardiol 2016;225:402–7. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.037 PubMed DOI

Ultra-high-frequency ECG volumetric and negative derivative epicardial ventricular electrical activation pattern

Ultra-High-Frequency ECG in Cardiac Pacing and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: From Technical Concept to Clinical Application

3-Dimensional ventricular electrical activation pattern assessed from a novel high-frequency electrocardiographic imaging technique: principles and clinical importance