Background: We aimed to evaluate whether baseline GLS and NT-proBNP and their changes after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can predict the long-term clinical outcomes and the echocardiographic-based response to CRT (defined by 15% relative reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume). Methods: We enrolled 143 patients with stable, ischemic heart failure (HF) undergoing CRT-D implantation. NT-proBNP and echocardiogram were obtained before and 6 months after. The patients were followed-up (median: 58 months) for HF-related deaths and/or HF hospitalizations (primary endpoint) or HF-related deaths (secondary endpoint) Results: 84 patients achieved the primary and 53 the secondary endpoint, while 104 patients were considered as CRT-responders and 39 as non-responders. At baseline, event-free patients had higher absolute GLS values (p<0.001) and lower NT-proBNP serum levels (p<0001) than those achieving primary endpoint. A similar pattern was observed in favor of CRT-responders vs non-responders. In Cox regression analysis, lower baseline absolute GLS value (HR=0.77;95%CI, 0.51-1.91; p=0.002), higher baseline NT-proBNP levels (HR=1.55;95%CI, 1.43-2.01;p=0.002) and diabetes (HR=1.27;95%CI, 1.12-1.98;p=0.003) were associated with lower incidence of primary endpoint. Conclusions: In HF patients undergoing CRT-D, baseline GLS and NT-proBNP concentrations may serve as prognostic factors, while they may predict the echocardiographic-based response to CRT.

: Oscillation synchronization through diffusion-based communication of active materials can lead to emergence of diverse patterns and collective behaviors. A detailed general description of the formation process of synchronization or resynchronization dynamics is a challenging task. We employ a photosensitive Belousov-Zhabotinsky reaction-diffusion model (within a gel media) to investigate the recovery process of oscillation synchronization between a pair of gel patches. The recovery time for oscillation resynchronization can be modulated by patch-distance, species of signaling molecules, intensity and duration of illumination. Analysis reveals that the “switch effect” of the gel-distance and the “promotion effect” from illumination on the oscillation resynchronization originate from the competition between processes of photo-promotion of oscillation, diffusion of signaling molecules (HBrO2 and Br-) and disproportionation of HBrO2. These results will benefit studies on bio-inspired active materials and soft motors.

Abstract Objective: To review the relevant literature on the use of atrioventricular node ablation and pacing in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Methods: A PubMed/MEDLINE and SCOPUS search was performed in order to assess the clinical outcomes of atrioventricular node ablation and pacemaker implantation, as well as the complications that may occur. Results: Several clinical trials, observational analyses and meta-analyses have shown that “pace and ablate” strategy not only improves symptoms but also can enhance cardiac performance in patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Although this procedure is effective and safe, some complications may occur including worsening of heart failure, permanent fibrillation, arrhythmias and sudden death. Regarding the implantation of pacemaker, cardiac resynchronization therapy is shown to be the optimal choice compared to right ventricle apical pacing. His bundle pacing is a promising alternative to cardiac resynchronization therapy and has shown beneficial effects, while left bundle brunch pacing is an innovative modality. Conclusions: Atrioventricular node ablation and implantation of pacemaker is shown to have beneficial effects on clinical outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation ± heart failure who do not respond or are intolerant to medical treatment. Cardiac resynchronization therapy is the treatment of choice and His bundle pacing seems to be an effective alternative way of pacing in these patients.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via biventricular pacing (BiVP-CRT) is considered a mainstay treatment for symptomatic heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction and wide QRS. However, up to one third of patients receiving BiVP-CRT are considered non-responders to the therapy. Multiples strategies have been proposed to maximize the percentage of CRT responders including two new physiological pacing modalities that have emerged during the lasts years: His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Both pacing techniques aim at restoring the normal electrical activation of the ventricles through the native conduction system in opposition to the cell-to-cell activation of conventional right ventricular myocardial pacing. Conduction system pacing (CSP), including both HBP and LBBAP appears to be a promising pacing modality for delivering CRT and has proven to be safe and feasible in this particular setting. This article will review the current state of the art of CSP-based CRT, its limitations and future directions.

Introduction: Digitalis use in patients with severe heart failure is controversial. We assessed the effects of digitalis therapy on mortality in a large, observational study in recipients of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Methods: Consecutive patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator in three European tertiary referral centers were enrolled and followed for a median of 28 months. Digitalis use was assessed at the time of CRT implantation. Multivariate Cox-regression model and propensity score matching was used to determine all-cause mortality as primary endpoint. CRT-response (defined as improvement of ≥1 NYHA class), echocardiographic improvement (defined as improvement of LVEF of ≥ 5%), and ICD shocks were assessed as secondary endpoints. Results: The study comprised 552 CRT recipients with standard indications, including 219 patients (40%) treated with digitalis. Compared to patients without digitalis, they had more often atrial fibrillation, poorer LVEF and higher NYHA class (all p ≤ 0.002). Crude analysis of all-cause mortality demonstrated a similar relative risk of death for patients with and without digitalis (HR=1.14; 95% CI 0.88-1.5; p=0.40). After adjustment for independent predictors of mortality, digitalis therapy did not alter the risk for death (adjusted HR=1.04; 95% CI 0.75-1.45; p=0.82). Also, in comparison to 286 propensity score matched patients, mortality was not affected by digitalis intake (propensity adjusted HR=1.11; 95% CI 0.72-1.70; p=0.64). CRT response was predominant in digitalis non-users concerning both improvement of HF symptoms and LVEF (NYHA p<0.01; LVEF p<0.01) while patients on digitalis had more often ventricular tachyarrhythmias requiring ICD shock (p=0.01). Conclusions: Digitalis therapy had no effect on mortality but did negatively affect CRT response and susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias requiring ICD shock treatment.