Atrioventricular and ventricular-to-ventricular programming in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy: results from ALTITUDE.

PURPOSE: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in patients with heart failure, yet response rates are variable. We sought to determine whether physician-specified CRT programming was associated with improved outcomes. METHODS: Using data from the ALTITUDE remote follow-up cohort, we examined sensed atrioventricular (AV) and ventricular-to-ventricular (VV) programming and their associated outcomes in patients with de novo CRT from 2009-2010. Outcomes included arrhythmia burden, left ventricular (LV) pacing, and all-cause mortality at 4 years. RESULTS: We identified 5709 patients with de novo CRT devices; at the time of implant, 34% (n = 1959) had entirely nominal settings programmed, 40% (n = 2294) had only AV timing adjusted, 11% (n = 604) had only VV timing adjusted, and 15% (n = 852) had both AV and VV adjusted from nominal programming. Suboptimal LV pacing (<95%) during follow-up was similar across groups; however, the proportion with atrial fibrillation (AF) burden >5% was lowest in the AV-only adjusted group (17.9%) and highest in the nominal (27.7%) and VV-only adjusted (28.3%) groups. Adjusted all-cause mortality was significantly higher among patients with non-nominal AV delay >120 vs. <120 ms (adjusted heart rate (HR) 1.28, p = 0.008) but similar when using the 180-ms cutoff (adjusted HR 1.13 for >180 vs. ≤180 ms, p = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Nominal settings for de novo CRT implants are frequently altered, most commonly the AV delay. There is wide variability in reprogramming. Patients with nominal or AV-only adjustments appear to have favorable pacing and arrhythmia outcomes. Sensed AV delays less than 120 ms are associated with improved survival.

Duke Scholars

Author Kevin Patrick Jackson Medicine, Cardiology

Author Camille Genise Frazier Medicine, Cardiology

Author Jonathan Paul Piccini Sr. Medicine, Cardiology