Heart failure patients with prior right ventricular pacing upgraded to resynchronization therapy had a worse prognosis compared to de novo cardiac resynchronization therapy at 1-year follow-up. Results from a Chagas disease cohort

Abstract Background Adaptive cardiac resynchronization therapy (aCRT) algorithm provides synchronized left ventricular (LV) only pacing and ambulatory optimization of the intrinsic atrioventricular and interventricular conduction intervals. Studies reporting morbidity and mortality outcomes of aCRT carriers in daily clinical practice are lacking. Purpose To determine in a real-life setting, whether 1-year outcomes were different among CRT carriers undergoing aCRT pacing and those under conventional biventricular (biV) pacing. Methods Symptomatic heart failure (HF) patients with sinus rhythm undergoing first CRT-defibrillator implant were selected from the UMBRELLA nationwide registry (2012–2017). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization at 12-month follow-up. HF admission was defined as hospitalization due to symptoms requiring intravenous diuretic treatment. Primary healthcare records were used to prospectively collect all data. Results Two hundred and six patients were collected (66.1±8.7 years; 73.3% male). Eighty-seven out of 206 patients were implanted with an aCRT capable device, but this algorithm was activated at implant and remained enabled at 1-year in 59 patients (aCRT group). The other 147 patients composed the non-aCRT group. At implant left bundle branch block was present in 93% of patients, 69.6% of population was in functional class III or IV and mean left ventricle ejection fraction was of 26.5±5.6%. Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy was present in 63.1% of patients and optimal medical treatment was achieved in majority of population (92% of patients with beta-blockers; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitorsor angiotensin II receptor blockersin 89%). The percentage of ventricular pacing through 12 months was 96.1±9.4% in non-aCRT patients and 97.5±2.7% in aCRT patients (p=0.261). In aCRT patients, LV-only pacing accounted for a mean of 53.3±37.6% of all ventricular pacing. After 12-month follow-up period, 25 patients (12.1%) met the primary composite endpoint of death or HF hospitalization. Nine patients died and nineteen patients were admitted due to worsening HF. There was no difference in the risk of all-cause death or HF hospitalization between aCRT and non-aCRT patients (10.2% vs. 12.9% respectively; OR=0.76, CI: 0.29–2.01, p=0.585) Conclusions In this contemporary cohort of HF patients undergoing CRT with high percentages of ventricular pacing, clinical performance of aCRT algorithm was adequate. The risk of death or HF hospitalization was low and no differences were observed at one-year follow-up. Future randomized studies will clarify the role of this algorithm in CRT carriers. Acknowledgement/Funding None

Download Full-text

Time trends in sudden cardiac death risk in heart failure patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/eurheartj/ehz773 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 41 (21) ◽

pp. 1976-1986 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Sérgio Barra ◽

Rui Providência ◽

Kumar Narayanan ◽

Serge Boveda ◽

Rudolf Duehmke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Sudden Cardiac Death ◽

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ◽

Cardiac Death ◽

Cardiac Resynchronization ◽

Resynchronization Therapy ◽

Heart Failure Patients ◽

The Difference ◽

Over Time

Abstract Aims While data from randomized trials suggest a declining incidence of sudden cardiac death (SCD) among heart failure patients, the extent to which such a trend is present among patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has not been evaluated. We therefore assessed changes in SCD incidence, and associated factors, in CRT recipients over the last 20 years. Methods and results Literature search from inception to 30 April 2018 for observational and randomized studies involving CRT patients, with or without defibrillator, providing specific cause-of-death data. Sudden cardiac death was the primary endpoint. For each study, rate of SCD per 1000 patient-years of follow-up was calculated. Trend line graphs were subsequently constructed to assess change in SCD rates over time, which were further analysed by device type, patient characteristics, and medical therapy. Fifty-three studies, comprising 22 351 patients with 60 879 patient-years of follow-up and a total of 585 SCD, were included. There was a gradual decrease in SCD rates since the early 2000s in both randomized and observational studies, with rates falling more than four-fold. The rate of decline in SCD was steeper than that of all-cause mortality, and accordingly, the proportion of deaths which were due to SCD declined over the years. The magnitude of absolute decline in SCD was more prominent among CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) patients compared to those receiving CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D), with the difference in SCD rates between CRT-P and CRT-D decreasing considerably over time. There was a progressive increase in age, use of beta-blockers, and left ventricular ejection fraction, and conversely, a decrease in QRS duration and antiarrhythmic drug use. Conclusion Sudden cardiac death rates have progressively declined in the CRT heart failure population over time, with the difference between CRT-D vs. CRT-P recipients narrowing considerably.

Download Full-text