TY - JOUR
T1 - A novel algorithm for individualized cardiac resynchronization therapy
T2 - Rationale and design of the adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy trial
AU - Krum, Henry
AU - Lemke, Bernd
AU - Birnie, David
AU - Lee, Kathy Lai Fun
AU - Aonuma, Kazutaka
AU - Starling, Randall C.
AU - Gasparini, Maurizio
AU - Gorcsan, John
AU - Rogers, Tyson
AU - Sambelashvili, Alex
AU - Kalmes, Amy
AU - Martin, David
N1 - Funding Information:
The aCRT trial is sponsored and funded by Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN. The authors and Medtronic, Inc, are responsible for the design and conduct of the trial. The authors are solely responsible for the drafting and editing of the manuscript and its final contents.
PY - 2012/5
Y1 - 2012/5
N2 - Background: The magnitude of benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) varies significantly among its recipients; approximately 30% of CRT patients do not report clinical improvement. Optimization of CRT pacing parameters can further improve cardiac function, both acutely and chronically. Echocardiographic optimization is used in clinical practice, but it is time and resource consuming. In addition, optimal settings at rest may change later with activity or cardiac remodeling. The adaptive CRT (aCRT) algorithm was designed to provide automatic ambulatory adjustment of CRT pacing configuration (left ventricular or biventricular pacing) and device delays based on periodic measurement of electrical conduction intervals. Methods: The aCRT algorithm is currently undergoing evaluation in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, worldwide clinical trial. The trial enrolled 522 patients, who satisfied standard clinical indications for a CRT device. Within 2 weeks after the implant, the patients were randomized to aCRT versus echo-optimized biventricular pacing (Echo) settings in 2:1 ratio and followed up at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month postrandomization. The noninferiority primary trial objectives at 6-month postrandomization are to demonstrate that (a) the percentage of aCRT patients who improved in their clinical composite score is at least as high as the percentage of Echo patients; (b) cardiac performance as assessed by echocardiography is similar when using aCRT settings versus echo-optimized settings; and (c) aCRT does not result in inappropriate device settings. First and last patient enrollments occurred in November 2009 and December 2010, respectively. Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of the aCRT algorithm will be evaluated in this ongoing clinical trial.
AB - Background: The magnitude of benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) varies significantly among its recipients; approximately 30% of CRT patients do not report clinical improvement. Optimization of CRT pacing parameters can further improve cardiac function, both acutely and chronically. Echocardiographic optimization is used in clinical practice, but it is time and resource consuming. In addition, optimal settings at rest may change later with activity or cardiac remodeling. The adaptive CRT (aCRT) algorithm was designed to provide automatic ambulatory adjustment of CRT pacing configuration (left ventricular or biventricular pacing) and device delays based on periodic measurement of electrical conduction intervals. Methods: The aCRT algorithm is currently undergoing evaluation in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, worldwide clinical trial. The trial enrolled 522 patients, who satisfied standard clinical indications for a CRT device. Within 2 weeks after the implant, the patients were randomized to aCRT versus echo-optimized biventricular pacing (Echo) settings in 2:1 ratio and followed up at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month postrandomization. The noninferiority primary trial objectives at 6-month postrandomization are to demonstrate that (a) the percentage of aCRT patients who improved in their clinical composite score is at least as high as the percentage of Echo patients; (b) cardiac performance as assessed by echocardiography is similar when using aCRT settings versus echo-optimized settings; and (c) aCRT does not result in inappropriate device settings. First and last patient enrollments occurred in November 2009 and December 2010, respectively. Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of the aCRT algorithm will be evaluated in this ongoing clinical trial.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861322305&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861322305&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.02.007
DO - 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.02.007
M3 - Article
C2 - 22607850
AN - SCOPUS:84861322305
SN - 0002-8703
VL - 163
SP - 747-752.e1
JO - American Heart Journal
JF - American Heart Journal
IS - 5
ER -