Background: The development of both electrical reverse remodeling and mechanical reverse remodeling (ERR+MRR) after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation could reduce the incidence of lethal arrhythmia, hence the prediction of ERR+MRR is clinically important.Methods and Results:Eighty-three patients (54 male; 67±12 years old) with CRT >6 months were enrolled. ERR was defined as baseline intrinsic QRS duration (iQRSd) shortening ≥10 ms in lead II on ECG after CRT, and MRR as improvement in LVEF ≥25% on echocardiography after CRT. Acute ECG changes were measured by comparing the pre-implant and immediate post-implant ECG. Ventricular arrhythmia episodes, including ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation, detected by the implanted device were recorded. Patients were classified as ERR only (n=12), MRR only (n=23), ERR+MRR (n=26), or non-responder (ERR- & MRR-, n=22). On multivariate regression analysis, difference between baseline intrinsic QRS and paced QRS duration (∆QRSd) >35 ms was a significant predictor of ERR+MRR (sensitivity, 68%; specificity, 64%; AUC, 0.7; P=0.003), and paced QTc >443 ms was a negative predictor of ERR+MRR (sensitivity, 78%; specificity, 60%; AUC, 0.7; P=0.002). On Cox proportional hazard modeling, ERR+MRR may reduce risk of ventricular arrhythma around 70% compared with non-responder (HR, 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13-0.65).
Conclusions: Acute ECG changes after CRT were useful predictors of ERR+MRR. ERR+MRR was also a protective factor for ventricular arrhythmia.
Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Electrical reverse remodeling; Mechanical reverse remodeling; Pacing QRS duration; QTc interval.