Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Pacing in proximity to scar during cardiac resynchronization therapy increases local dispersion of repolarization and susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmogenesis. / Mendonca Costa, Caroline; Neic, Aurel; Kerfoot, Eric et al.
In: Heart Rhythm, Vol. 16, No. 10, 10.2019, p. 1475-1483.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Pacing in proximity to scar during cardiac resynchronization therapy increases local dispersion of repolarization and susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmogenesis.
AU - Mendonca Costa, Caroline
AU - Neic, Aurel
AU - Kerfoot, Eric
AU - Porter, Bradley
AU - Sieniewicz, Benjamin
AU - Gould, Justin
AU - Sidhu, Baldeep
AU - Chen, Zhong
AU - Plank, Gernot
AU - Rinaldi, Christopher A.
AU - Bishop, Martin J.
AU - Niederer, Steven A.
N1 - The data supporting this study is openly available at http://doi.org/10.18742/RDM01-570
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) increases the risk of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) when the left ventricular (LV) epicardial lead is implanted in proximity to scar.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine the mechanisms underpinning this risk by investigating the effects of pacing on local electrophysiology (EP) in relation to scar that provides a substrate for VT in ICM patients undergoing CRT.MethodsImaging data from ICM patients (n = 24) undergoing CRT were used to create patient-specific LV anatomic computational models including scar morphology. Simulations of LV epicardial pacing at 0.2–4.5 cm from the scar were performed using EP models of chronic infarct and heart failure (HF). Dispersion of repolarization and the vulnerable window were computed as surrogates for VT risk.ResultsSimulations predict that pacing in proximity to scar (0.2 cm) compared to more distant pacing to a scar (4.5 cm) significantly (P <.01) increased dispersion of repolarization in the vicinity of the scar and widened (P <.01) the vulnerable window, increasing the likelihood of unidirectional block. Moreover, slow conduction during HF further increased dispersion (∼194%). Analysis of variance and post hoc tests show significantly (P <.01) reduced repolarization dispersion when pacing ≥3.5 cm from the scar compared to pacing at 0.2 cm.ConclusionIncreased dispersion of repolarization in the vicinity of the scar and widening of the vulnerable window when pacing in proximity to scar provides a mechanistic explanation for VT induction in ICM-CRT with lead placement proximal to scar. Pacing 3.5 cm or more from scar may avoid increasing VT risk in ICM-CRT patients.
AB - BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) increases the risk of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) when the left ventricular (LV) epicardial lead is implanted in proximity to scar.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine the mechanisms underpinning this risk by investigating the effects of pacing on local electrophysiology (EP) in relation to scar that provides a substrate for VT in ICM patients undergoing CRT.MethodsImaging data from ICM patients (n = 24) undergoing CRT were used to create patient-specific LV anatomic computational models including scar morphology. Simulations of LV epicardial pacing at 0.2–4.5 cm from the scar were performed using EP models of chronic infarct and heart failure (HF). Dispersion of repolarization and the vulnerable window were computed as surrogates for VT risk.ResultsSimulations predict that pacing in proximity to scar (0.2 cm) compared to more distant pacing to a scar (4.5 cm) significantly (P <.01) increased dispersion of repolarization in the vicinity of the scar and widened (P <.01) the vulnerable window, increasing the likelihood of unidirectional block. Moreover, slow conduction during HF further increased dispersion (∼194%). Analysis of variance and post hoc tests show significantly (P <.01) reduced repolarization dispersion when pacing ≥3.5 cm from the scar compared to pacing at 0.2 cm.ConclusionIncreased dispersion of repolarization in the vicinity of the scar and widening of the vulnerable window when pacing in proximity to scar provides a mechanistic explanation for VT induction in ICM-CRT with lead placement proximal to scar. Pacing 3.5 cm or more from scar may avoid increasing VT risk in ICM-CRT patients.
KW - Cardiac resynchronization therapy
KW - Infarct scar
KW - Patient-specific modeling
KW - Ventricular tachycardia
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072259621&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.03.027
DO - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.03.027
M3 - Article
VL - 16
SP - 1475
EP - 1483
JO - Heart Rhythm
JF - Heart Rhythm
SN - 1547-5271
IS - 10
ER -
King's College London - Homepage
© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454