Long-term results of cardiac contractility modulation in patients with chronic heart failure

Aim. Evaluate the overall effectiveness of cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) therapy in patients with chronic heart failure of various etiology.

Methods. The study included 61 patients with chronic heart failure (NYHA class II-III), ejection fraction 20-40% and narrow QRS <130 ms, who were implanted the CCM devices. Depending on the etiology of heart failure, ischemic cardiomyopathy prevailed (41 patients). All patients were performed echocardiography, 6-min walk test and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (MHFLQ). Results. The observation period was 25 months. All 54 patients significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction from 32.2% to 37.6% (р=0.026) and volume parameters (left ventricle end systolic volume from 150 to 137 ml (р=0.034), left ventricle end diastolic volume from 220 to 201 ml (р=0.044), reduced the heart failure NYHA class >1 in 29 (53.7%) patients (р=0.015), increased 6-min walk test from 265 to 343 m (р=0.029), and the MHFLQ improved from 46.1 to 35.8 (р=0.042). Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy was associated with significant improvement in MHFLQ (from 42.7 to 30.3, р=0.029) and lowering the heart failure NYHA class>1 (83.3%, vs 47.2%, p=0.012) compared to ischemic group. Conclusion. CCM is safe and effective in patients with chronic heart failure NYHA class II-III, ejection fraction 20- 40% and narrow QRS˂130 ms, who were implanted the CCM devices. Depending on the etiology of heart failure, ischemic cardiomyopathy prevailed (41 patients). All patients were performed echocardiography, 6-min walk test and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire (MHFLQ).

Results. The observation period was 25 months. All 54 patients significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction from 32.2% to 37.6% (р=0.026) and volume parameters (left ventricle end systolic volume from 150 to 137 ml (р=0.034), left ventricle end diastolic volume from 220 to 201 ml (р=0.044), reduced the heart failure NYHA class >1 in 29 (53.7%) patients (р=0.015), increased 6-min walk test from 265 to 343 m (р=0.029), and the MHFLQ improved from 46.1 to 35.8 (р=0.042). Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy was associated with significant improvement in MHFLQ (from 42.7 to 30.3, р=0.029) and lowering the heart failure NYHA class>1 (83.3%, vs 47.2%, p=0.012) compared to ischemic group.

Conclusion. CCM is safe and effective in patients with chronic heart failure NYHA class II-III, ejection fraction 20- 40% and narrow QRS˂130 ms. Non-ischemic etiology of cardiomyopathy was associated with significant improvement in MHFLQ and lowering the heart failure class. 

1. Dawber Т, Kannel WB, Revotskie N, et al. The Epidemiology of Coronary Heart Disease - The Framingham Enquiry. Ann Intern Med. 1962;S5: 265-271.

2. Nielsen OW, Hilden J, Larsen CT, et al. Cross-sectional study estimating prevalence of heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction in community patients at risk. Heart. 2001;87: 172-178. https://doi.org/10.1136/heart.86.2.172.

3. Camm J, Lusher TF, Serruis PV. Cardiovascular disease. GEOTAR-Media. Moscow 2011: p. 1480 (In Russ.).

4. Mareev VYu, Fomin IV, Ageyev FT, et al. Clinical guidelines HFA-RSC-RSMAF. Heart failure: chronic and acute decompensated. Diagnosis, prophylaxis, treatment. Kardiologiia. 2018;58(6S): 8-158 (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18087/cardio.2475.

5. Pappone C, Vicedomini G, Salvati A, et al. Electrical modulation of cardiac contractility: clinical aspects in congestive heart failure. Heart Fail Rev. 2001;(6): 55-60. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009807309006.

6. Pappone C, Augello G, Rosanio S, et al. First human chronic experience with cardiac contractility modulation by nonexcitatory electrical currents for treating systolic heart failure: mid-term safety and efficacy results from a multicenter study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(4): 418-27. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-8167.2004.03580.

7. Burkhoff D, Shemer I, Felzen B, et al. Electric currents applied during the refractory period can modulate cardiac contractility in vitro and in vivo. Heart Fail Rev. 2001;6(1): 27-34. https://doi.org doi:10.1023/a:1009851107189.

8. Stix G, Borggrefe M, Wolpert C, et al. Chronic electrical stimulation during the absolute refractory period of the myocardium improves severe heart failure. Eur Heart J. 2004;25(8): 650-655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2004.02.027.

9. Giallauria F, Vigorito C, Piepoli M, Coats A. Effects of cardiac contractility modulation by non-excitatory electrical stimulation on exercise capacity and quality of life: An individual patient’s data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Cardiol. 2014;175: 352-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.06.005.

10. Liu M, Fang F, Luo X, et al. Improvement of longterm survival by cardiac contractility modulation in heart failure patients: A case-control study. Int J Cardiol. 2016;206: 122-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.01.071.

11. Kadish A, Nademanee K, Volosin K, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of cardiac contractility modulation in advanced heart failure. Am Heart J. 2011; 161(2): 329-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2010.10.025.

12. Abraham W, Kuck KH, Goldsmith RL, et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Cardiac Contractility Modulation. JACC Heart Failure. 2018;6 (10): 874-883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchf.2018.04.010.

13. Al-Ghamdi B, Shafquat A, Mallawi Y. Cardiac contractility modulation therapy: Are there superresponders? Heart Case Reports. 2017;3(4): 229-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrcr.2017.02.004.

14. Vander MA, Lyasnikova EA, Belyakova LA, et al. Dynamics of heart failure markers and cardiac reverse remodeling in patients receiving cardiac contractility modulation therapy. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2021;26(1): 4035. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.15829/1560-4071-2021-4035.