AimsThere are limited and contradictory data on the effects of CRT with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (CRT-D) on mortality as compared with CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P).Methods and resultsWe evaluated the long-term outcome of patients implanted with a CRT-D or CRT-P device in our high-volume single-centre experience. Data on all-cause mortality were derived from clinic visits and the Hungarian National Healthcare Fund Death Registry. Kaplan–Meier survival analyses and multivariate Cox regression models were used to evaluate all-cause mortality in patients with CRT-D vs. CRT-P, stratified by the aetiology of cardiomyopathy. From 2000 to 2011, 1122 CRT devices, 693 CRT-P (LVEF 28.2 ± 7.4%) and 429 CRT-D (LVEF 27.6 ± 6.4%), were implanted at our centre. During the median follow-up of 28 months, 379 patients died from any cause, 250 patients (36%) with an implanted CRT-P and 129 patients (30%) with an implanted CRT-D. There was no evidence of mortality benefit in patients implanted with a CRT-D compared with a CRT-P in the total cohort [hazard ratio (HR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73–1.32, P = 0.884]. In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, CRT-D treatment was associated with a significant 30% risk reduction in all-cause mortality compared with an implanted CRT-P (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51–0.97, P = 0.03). In non-ischaemic patients, there was no mortality benefit of CRT-D over CRT-P (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.73–1.32, P = 0.894, interaction P-value = 0.15).ConclusionsIn heart failure patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, CRT-D was associated with a mortality benefit compared with CRT-P, but no benefit of CRT-D over CRT-P in mortality was observed in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy.
f(QRS-T) angle may be used as a beneficial tool for determining high risk patients in acute STEMI. Unlike previous studies, we showed for the first time that that post-procedural f(QRS-T) can predict in-hospital mortality and TT failure.
AimsData on longer right to left ventricular activation delay (RV-LV AD) predicting clinical outcome after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) by left bundle branch block (LBBB) are limited. We aimed to evaluate the impact of RV-LV AD on N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), ejection fraction (EF), and clinical outcome in patients implanted with CRT, stratified by LBBB at baseline.Methods and resultsHeart failure (HF) patients undergoing CRT implantation with EF ≤ 35% and QRS ≥ 120 ms were evaluated based on their RV-LV AD at implantation. Baseline and 6-month clinical parameters, EF, and NT-proBNP values were assessed. The primary endpoint was HF or death, the secondary endpoint was all-cause mortality. A total of 125 patients with CRT were studied, 62% had LBBB. During the median follow-up of 2.2 years, 44 (35%) patients had HF/death, 36 (29%) patients died. Patients with RV-LV AD ≥ 86 ms (lower quartile) had significantly lower risk of HF/death [hazard ratio (HR): 0.44; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.23–0.82; P = 0.001] and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.23–1.00; P = 0.05), compared with those with RV-LV AD < 86 ms. Patients with RV-LV AD ≥ 86 ms and LBBB showed the greatest improvement in EF (28–36%; P<0.001), NT-proBNP (2771–1216 ng/mL; P < 0.001), and they had better HF-free survival (HR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.11–0.49, P < 0.001) and overall survival (HR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.16–0.75; P = 0.007). There was no difference in outcome by RV-LV AD in non-LBBB patients.ConclusionLeft bundle branch block patients with longer RV-LV activation delay at CRT implantation had greater improvement in NT-proBNP, EF, and significantly better clinical outcome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.