Leadless ultrasound-based cardiac resynchronization system in heart failure
Recommended Citation
Singh JP, Rinaldi CA, Sanders P, et al. Leadless Ultrasound-Based Cardiac Resynchronization System in Heart Failure. JAMA Cardiol. 2024;9(10):871-879. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2024.2050
Abstract
Importance: Approximately 40% of patients with heart failure (HF) who are eligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) either fail to respond or are untreatable due to anatomical constraints.
Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of a novel, leadless, left ventricular (LV) endocardial pacing system for patients at high risk for a CRT upgrade or whose coronary sinus (CS) lead placement/pacing with a conventional CRT system failed.
Design, setting, and participants: The SOLVE-CRT study was a prospective multicenter trial, enrolling January 2018 through September 2022, with follow-up in March 2023. Data were analyzed from DATE MONTH, YEAR, through DATE MONTH, YEAR. The trial combined data from an initial randomized, double-blind study (n = 108) and a subsequent single-arm part (n = 75). It took place at 36 centers across Australia, Europe, and the US. Participants were nonresponders, previously untreatable (PU), or high-risk upgrades (HRU). All participants contributed to the safety analysis. The primary efficacy analysis (n = 100) included 75 PU-HRU patients from the single-arm part and 25 PU-HRU patients from the randomized treatment arm.
Interventions: Patients were implanted with the WiSE CRT System (EBR Systems) consisting of a leadless LV endocardial pacing electrode stimulated with ultrasound energy delivered by a subcutaneously implanted transmitter and battery.
Main outcomes and measures: The primary safety end point was freedom from type I complications. The primary efficacy end point was a reduction in mean LV end systolic volume (LVESV).
Results: The study included 183 participants; mean age was 68.1 (SD, 10.3) years and 141 were male (77%). The trial was terminated at an interim analysis for meeting prespecified stopping criteria. In the safety population, patients were either New York Heart Association Class II (34.6%) or III (65.4%). The primary efficacy end point was met with a 16.4% (95% CI, -21.0% to -11.7%) reduction in mean LVESV (P = .003). The primary safety end point was met with an 80.9% rate of freedom from type I complications (P < .001), which included 12 study device system events (6.6%), 5 vascular events (2.7%), 3 strokes (1.6%), and 7 cardiac perforations which mostly occurred early in the study (3.8%).
Conclusions and relevance: The SOLVE-CRT study has demonstrated that leadless LV endocardial pacing with the WiSE CRT system is associated with a reduction in LVESV in patients with HF. This novel system may represent an alternative to conventional CRT implants in some HF patient populations.
Type
Article
PubMed ID
39083254