Impact of myocardial phenotype on atrioventricular delay optimization at rest and during exercise: insights from a virtual patient study

Abstract

Abstract Background The usefulness of atrioventricular delay (AVD) optimization in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for heart failure (HF) patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is still debated. Yet, studies have not explored the role of non-electrical myocardial disease substrates in determining optimal AVD settings among patients. Purpose We first hypothesized that acute response to AVD optimization might be modulated by various myocardial disease substrates. Furthermore, we hypothesized that cardiac function is more sensitive to changes in AV coupling during exercise and that this sensitivity is also modulated by underlying myocardial disease substrates. Methods We used the CircAdapt model of the human heart and circulation to simulate different types of LV remodeling that can be found in CRT candidates. First, an LBBB-like pattern of mechanical activation was imposed by delaying LV free wall (LVFW) and interventricular septal (IVS) activation relative to right ventricular free wall activation. Then, two types of LV remodeling were simulated by LV dilation with preserved or impaired myocardial contractility, resulting in LVEF <35%. To investigate the effect of diastolic dysfunction, we increased passive myocardial stiffness of the IVS and LVFW on both substrates with LV remodeling until a mean left atrial pressure (mLAP) of 14 mmHg was reached. CRT was simulated by resynchronizing IVS and LVFW. AVD optimization was conducted by gradually reducing the paced AVD from 220 ms to 40 ms in steps of 20 ms. In each simulation, the optimal paced AVD at rest (cardiac output (CO) and heart rate (HR) of 4.2 L/min and 80 bpm, respectively) was assessed using stroke volume (SV) and mLAP which is used as a measure of LV filling pressure. To investigate the relative effect of these myocardial phenotypes during AVD optimization under exercise, CO and HR were increased step-wise. Results The gain in SV by AVD optimization was larger in the simulations with healthy myocardium than in those with hypo-contractile and stiff myocardium (Figure 1: top-row). However, mLAP was comparably decreased by AVD optimization in healthy and diseased myocardium (Figure 1: bottom row). During exercise, the optimum AVD shifted to shorter values (Figure 2: top-row), and mLAP was much more sensitive to AVD, particularly in the presence of hypo-contractile and stiff myocardium (Figure 2: bottom row). Conclusion Virtual patient simulations show that both myocardial hypocontractility and stiffness dampen the effect of AVD optimization on SV. Furthermore, simulations suggest that patients benefit more from AVD optimization during exercise than during resting conditions. These mechanistic insights may help to gain more benefit from AVD optimization for patients undergoing CRT.AVD optimization at restAVD optimization during exercise