Back

Personalized planning of cardiac resynchronization therapy through integration of coronary sinus geometry, clinical data, digital twins, and machine learning: visualization, stratification, and optimization

Bazhutina, A.; Chumarnaya, T.; Zubarev, S.; Budanova, M.; Stepanova, V.; Khamzin, S.; Lebedev, D.; Solovyova, O.

2026-07-02 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.07.01.26356827 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) fails in 30% of patients, often due to suboptimal left ventricular pacing site (LVPS) selection. Current practice lacks tools for pre-procedural, patient-specific LVPS optimization within the accessible coronary sinus (CS) tributaries. This study aimed to develop a digital twin and an explainable ML-based clinical decision support framework to address this issue. Methods: Personalized 3D cardiac models incorporating ventricular anatomy, myocardial fibrosis, and CS anatomy were constructed from CT and LGE-MRI for 74 CRT candidates. Finite-element Eikonal simulations of biventricular pacing generated patient-specific electrophysiological features at candidate LVPS. A Machine Learning (ML) classifier was trained on a hybrid feature set of pre-procedural clinical variables and model-derived indices, validated by leave-one-out cross-validation. SHAP analysis provided a physiologically interpretable rationale for each prediction. The framework was applied to a pilot cohort of 19 patients with reconstructed 3D CS anatomy to generate a spatial likelihood map of CRT response across all clinically implantable pacing sites within each patient's CS. Results: The ML classifier outperformed the reference Feeny clinical calculator under LOO-CV (accuracy 0.78 vs 0.58; F1-score 0.75 vs 0.43), AUC=0.78, sensitivity=0.80, specificity=0.77. Bootstrap analysis yielded mean AUC=0.85 (95% CI 0.70-0.95). In the pilot CS cohort, the framework identified that 8 of 13 clinical non-responders had no accessible CS site predicted to yield a positive response, supporting redirection towards alternative pacing strategies. In the remaining 5, alternative implantable sites with high predicted response probability were identified. SHAP analysis confirmed that dominant predictors were patient-specific in their relative contributions, supporting individualized over heuristic-based LVPS selection. Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a digital twin and explainable ML framework as a pre-procedural clinical decision support tool for CRT planning, stratifying patients and identifying optimal implantable sites with transparent anatomical rationale. Prospective validation and regulatory evaluation are required before clinical deployment.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.7%
2
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.8%
3
Frontiers in Physiology
106 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.8%
4
The American Journal of Cardiology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.4%
5
Heart
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.3%
7
Journal of the American Heart Association
140 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.3%
8
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
9
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 29%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
10
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.2%
11
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
53 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.1%
12
JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
13
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
14
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
15
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.1%
16
American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology
36 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
17
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
18
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.5%
19
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
20
Journal of Clinical Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
21
Bioengineering
29 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
22
Heart Rhythm
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
23
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
24
European Heart Journal
22 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
25
Nature Cardiovascular Research
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
26
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
27
Physiological Measurement
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
28
IEEE Access
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
30
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
18 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%