In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF), strict and regular rate control with atrioventricular junction ablation and biventricular pacemaker (Ablation + CRT) has been shown to be superior to pharmacological rate control in reducing HF hospitalizations. However, whether it also improves survival is unknown. In this international, open-label, blinded outcome trial, we randomly assigned patients with severely symptomatic permanent AF >6 months, narrow QRS (≤110 ms) and at least one HF hospitalization in the previous year to Ablation + CRT or to pharmacological rate control. We hypothesized that Ablation + CRT is superior in reducing the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality. A total of 133 patients were randomized. The mean age was 73 ± 10 years, and 62 (47%) were females. The trial was stopped for efficacy at interim analysis after a median of 29 months of follow-up per patient. The primary endpoint occurred in 7 patients (11%) in the Ablation + CRT arm and in 20 patients (29%) in the Drug arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10–0.65; P = 0.004]. The estimated death rates at 2 years were 5% and 21%, respectively; at 4 years, 14% and 41%. The benefit of Ablation + CRT of all-cause mortality was similar in patients with ejection fraction (EF) ≤35% and in those with >35%. The secondary endpoint combining all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization was significantly lower in the Ablation + CRT arm [18 (29%) vs. 36 (51%); HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22–0.73; P = 0.002]. Ablation + CRT was superior to pharmacological therapy in reducing mortality in patients with permanent AF and narrow QRS who were hospitalized for HF, irrespective of their baseline EF. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02137187.

The long-term impact of implantable device-related complications on the patient outcome has not been thoroughly evaluated. The aims of this retrospective, bi-centre study were to analyse the rate and nature of device-related complications requiring surgical revision in a large series of patients undergoing device implantation, elective generator replacement and pacing system upgrade and to systematically assess the impact of such complications on patient outcome and healthcare utilization. Data from 2671 consecutive procedures (1511 device implantations, 1034 elective generator replacements, and 126 pacing system upgrades) performed between January 2006 and March 2011 were retrospectively analysed. The outcome measures recorded were complication-related mortality, number of re-operations, need for complex surgical procedures, number of re-hospitalizations, and additional hospital treatment days. Over a median follow-up of 27 months, the overall rate of complications was 2.8% per procedure-year [9.5% in cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) device implantation, 6.1% in pacing system upgrade, 3.5% in implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation, 1.7% in pacemaker implantation, and 1.7% in generator replacement). The procedure with the highest risk of complications was CRT device implantation (odds ratio: 6.6; P < 0.001); these complications primarily involved coronary sinus lead dislodgement and device infection. Patients with complications had a significantly higher number of device-related hospitalizations (2.3 ± 0.6 vs. 1.0 ± 0.1; P < 0.001) and hospital treatment days (15.7 ± 25.1 vs. 3.6 ± 1.1; P < 0.001) than those without complications. Device infection was the complication with the greatest negative impact on patient outcome. Cardiac resynchronisation therapy implantation was the procedure with the highest risk of complications requiring surgical revision. Complications were associated with substantial clinical consequences and a significant increase in the number and length of hospitalizations.

Closed-loop stimulation (CLS) seemed promising in preventing the recurrence of vasovagal syncope (VVS) in patients with a cardioinhibitory response to head-up tilt test (HUTT) compared with conventional pacing. We hypothesized that the better results of this algorithm are due to its quick reaction in high-rate pacing delivered in the early phase of vasovagal reflex, which increase the cardiac output and the blood pressure preventing loss of consciousness. This prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicentre study was designed as an intra-patient comparison and enrolled 30 patients (age 62.2 ± 13.5 years, males 60.0%) with cardioinhibitory VVS, carrying a dual-chamber pacemaker incorporating CLS algorithm. Two HUTTs were performed one week apart: one during DDD-CLS 60–130/min pacing and the other during DDD 60/min pacing; patients were randomly and blindly assigned to two groups: in one the first HUTT was performed in DDD-CLS (n = 15), in the other in DDD (n = 15). Occurrence of syncope and haemodynamic variations induced by HUTT was recorded during the tests. Compared with DDD, DDD-CLS significantly reduced the occurrence of syncope induced by HUTT (30.0% vs. 76.7%; P < 0.001). In the patients who had syncope in both DDD and DDD-CLS mode, DDD-CLS significantly delayed the onset of syncope during HUTT (from 20.8 ± 3.9 to 24.8 ± 0.9 min; P = 0.032). The maximum fall in systolic blood pressure recorded during HUTT was significantly lower in DDD-CLS compared with DDD (43.2 ± 30.3 vs. 65.1 ± 25.8 mmHg; P = 0.004). In patients with cardioinhibitory VVS, CLS reduces the occurrence of syncope induced by HUTT, compared with DDD pacing. When CLS is not able to abort the vasovagal reflex, it seems to delay the onset of syncope.

Closed-loop stimulation (CLS) pacing has shown greater efficacy in preventing the recurrence of vasovagal syncope (VVS) in patients with a cardioinhibitory response to head-up tilt test (HUTT) compared with conventional pacing. Moreover, there is no conclusive evidence to support the superiority of CLS over the conventional algorithms for syncope prevention. This study retrospectively evaluated the effectiveness of CLS pacing compared with dual-chamber pacing with conventional specialized sensing and pacing algorithms for syncope prevention in the prevention of syncope recurrence in patients with refractory VVS and a cardioinhibitory response to HUTT during a long-term follow-up. Forty-one patients (44% male, 53 ± 16 years) with recurrent, refractory VVS (26% with trauma) and a cardioinhibitory response to HUTT who had undergone pacemaker implantation were included in the analysis. Twenty-five patients received a dual-chamber CLS pacemaker (CLS group) and 16 patients received a dual-chamber pacemaker with conventional algorithms for syncope prevention (conventional pacing group): 9 patients with Medtronic rate drop response algorithm and 7 patients with Guidant-Boston Scientific sudden brady response algorithm. During the follow-up (mean 4.4 ± 3.0 years, interquartile range 2.2–7.4 years) one patient (4%) in the CLS group and six (38%) in the conventional pacing group had syncope recurrences (P= 0.016). The Kaplan–Meier actuarial estimate of first recurrence of syncope after 8 years was 4% in the CLS group and 40% in the conventional pacing group (P= 0.010). The results of this retrospective analysis show that, in order to prevent a recurrence of VVS in patients with a cardioinhibitory response to HUTT, dual-chamber CLS pacing was more effective than dual-chamber pacing with conventional algorithms for syncope prevention in preventing bradycardia-related syncope.