Roberto Tarantini, Willem Gerrits, Cheyenne S L Chiu, Leonie Smit, Gilbert Heltzel, Luuk H G A Hopman, Philippe C Wouters, Maarten J Cramer, Frebus J van Slochteren, Rene van Es, Alexander H Maass, Michiel Rienstra, Cornelis P Allaart, Kevin Vernooy, Antonius M W van Stipdonk, Frederik J de Lange, Dorien Laenens, Philippe van Rosendael, Jeroen J Bax, Nina Ajmone Marsan, Mathias Meine, Robin Nijveldt, Marco Guglielmo
HDF parameters provide complementary descriptive insight into ventricular mechanics in patients undergoing CRT. Baseline systolic angle was independently associated with both reverse remodeling and long-term outcome, although discrimination was not significantly improved. While these findings suggest potential value for HDF assessment, further research is warranted to determine the clinical relevance in CRT patients.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves survival and symptoms in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and electromechanical dyssynchrony, yet up to 30-40% do not respond despite guideline-based selection. Hemodynamic forces (HDF) quantify intraventricular pressure gradients and can be derived from routine echocardiographic images. The aim of this study was to assess the predictive and prognostic value of HDF parameters in patients undergoing CRT and to investigate changes in HDF after CRT implantation.
METHODS: The following HDF parameters were assessed in 198 patients from the multicenter, prospective MARC study: (i) apical-basal force, (ii) latero-septal force (iii) their ratio (iv) force vector angle, (v) systolic apical-basal force, (vi) systolic angle. CRT response was defined as ≥15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) at 6 months. The composite outcome of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization was analyzed using Cox regression models with long-term follow-up.
RESULTS: 120 patients (60.6%) demonstrated echocardiographic response to CRT at 6 months. The addition of baseline systolic angle to clinical, electrocardiographic, and conventional echocardiographic markers of dyssynchrony significantly improved model fit for CRT response, although discrimination was not significantly improved. Responders showed significant improvement in HDF parameters after CRT, whereas no significant changes were observed in non-responders. During a median follow-up of 9.3 years, baseline systolic angle was independently associated with the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization and significantly improved risk stratification when added to established prognostic markers.
CONCLUSION: HDF parameters provide complementary descriptive insight into ventricular mechanics in patients undergoing CRT. Baseline systolic angle was independently associated with both reverse remodeling and long-term outcome, although discrimination was not significantly improved. While these findings suggest potential value for HDF assessment, further research is warranted to determine the clinical relevance in CRT patients.