Abstract:Highlights • Synchronized left ventricular pacing (sLVP) rate was associated with improved cardiac function after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation • High sLVP rates were associated with better clinical outcomes • High sLVP rates were associated with a lower risk of cardiac death • sLVP ≧59.4 % was a significant predictor of CRT responders and better clinical outcomes Background The adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) algorithm enables synchronized left ventricular pacing (sLVP) to achieve fusion with intrinsic right ventricular activation. Although sLVP presents benefits over biventricular pacing, the adequate sLVP rate for better clinical outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to assess the association between sLVP rates and clinical outcomes. Methods Our study cohort included 271 consecutive patients, who underwent CRT implantation between April 2016 and August 2021. Results We evaluated 63 patients on whom we applied the aCRT algorithm [48 men, mean age: 64 ± 14 years; median follow-up period: 316 days (interquartile range: 212–809 days)]. At the 6-month follow-up after CRT implantation, the frequency of CRT responders was 71 % ( n = 45). The sLVP rate was significantly higher in responders than in non-responders (75 ± 30 % vs. 47 ± 40 %, p = 0.003). Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis revealed that the optimal cut-off value during the sLVP rate was 59.4 % for the prediction of CRT responders (area under the curve, 0.70; sensitivity, 80 %; specificity, 61 %; positive predictive value, 84 %; and negative predictive value, 55 %). Kaplan–Meier analysis demonstrated that the higher-sLVP group (sLVP ≧59.4 %, n = 43) had a better prognosis (cardiac death and heart failure hospitalization) than the lower-sLVP group (sLVP <59.4 %, n = 20) (log-rank p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox hazard analysis revealed that a higher sLVP rate was associated with a good prognosis ( p < 0.001). Conclusions sLVP was associated with CRT response, and a higher sLVP rate (≧59.4 %) was important for good prognosis in patients with aCRT. Graphical abstract Download : Download high-res image (103KB) Download : Download full-size image

Evaluation of synchronized left ventricular pacing rate over biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients With Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Using Left Bundle Branch Pacing

A New Method to Recommend Left Ventricular Lead Positions for Improved CRT Volumetric Response and Long-Term Prognosis

[Factors Associated with the Efficacy of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure].

Hemodynamic comparison of different multisites and multipoint pacing strategies in cardiac resynchronization therapies

Predictors for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Response

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy by Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients with Heart Failure and Left Bundle Branch Block

Ventricular-Arterial Coupling in Patients with Heart Failure Treated with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: May We Predict the Long-Term Clinical Response?

Effects of Adaptive Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Left-Bundle-Branch Area Pacing and Coronary Sinus Pacing

Left ventricular-only fusion pacing versus cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure patients: A randomized controlled trial

Resynchronization Effects and Clinical Outcomes During Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing with and Without Conduction System Capture.

Mechanical Synchrony and Myocardial Work in Heart Failure Patients with Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing and Comparison with Biventricular Pacing.

Efficacy of Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Biventricular Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Patients: Select Site - Cohort Study

Predictive Factors and Clinical Effect of Optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Isolated Left Ventricular and Biventricular Pacing in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure.

Optimizing electrical efficacy of leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy and leadless left ventricular septal pacing: Insights on left and right ventricular activation from electrocardiographic imaging

Correction: Effects of Adaptive Left Bundle Branch–optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: a Single Centre Experience

Clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing compared to biventricular pacing in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy

Conduction system pacing compared with biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: Results from International Collaborative LBBAP Study (I-CLAS) Group

Electrical Resynchronization and Clinical Outcomes During Long-Term Follow-Up in Intraventricular Conduction Delay Patients Applied Left Bundle Branch Pacing-Optimized Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Improvement of LV Reverse Remodeling Using Dynamic Programming of Fusion-Optimized Atrioventricular Intervals in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy