Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2016
Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Older Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Recipients Using a Pacemaker versus a Defibrillator.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Munir Muhammad Bilal, Althouse Andrew D, Rijal Shasank, Shah Maulin Bharat, Abu Daya Hussein, Adelstein Evan, Saba Samir
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is commonly used to manage heart failure, yet published guidelines do not distinguish between recommendations for pacemakers (CRT-P) and defibrillators (CRT-D) despite significant differences in size, longevity, and cost between these devices. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes between elderly recipients of CRT-P and CRT-D.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 512 patients (405 CRT-D, 107 CRT-P) aged ≥75 years with LV ejection fraction ≤35% and QRS duration >120 milliseconds were retrospectively analyzed for baseline characteristics and followed to the primary outcome of all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to adjust for possible confounders. Results were further validated through propensity matching cohorts. Compared to CRT-D recipients, CRT-P patients were older (83 years vs. 81 years, P < 0.001) and had more comorbid conditions (Charlson index = 5 [3-6] vs. 4 [3-5], P = 0.007). During 40.8 months of follow-up, there were 280 deaths. Compared to CRT-D patients, CRT-P recipients had higher unadjusted mortality (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.15-2.08, P = 0.004). However, this difference lost significance after adjusting for baseline differences between the groups (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78-1.77, P = 0.435).
CONCLUSION: Higher all-cause mortality in older CRT-P versus CRT-D patients is largely explained by baseline clinical and demographic differences between the two groups, which are likely the drivers of device selection in real-world clinical practice, where the published guidelines remain ambiguous. There is a need for randomized studies to determine optimal CRT device selection.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 512 patients (405 CRT-D, 107 CRT-P) aged ≥75 years with LV ejection fraction ≤35% and QRS duration >120 milliseconds were retrospectively analyzed for baseline characteristics and followed to the primary outcome of all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to adjust for possible confounders. Results were further validated through propensity matching cohorts. Compared to CRT-D recipients, CRT-P patients were older (83 years vs. 81 years, P < 0.001) and had more comorbid conditions (Charlson index = 5 [3-6] vs. 4 [3-5], P = 0.007). During 40.8 months of follow-up, there were 280 deaths. Compared to CRT-D patients, CRT-P recipients had higher unadjusted mortality (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.15-2.08, P = 0.004). However, this difference lost significance after adjusting for baseline differences between the groups (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78-1.77, P = 0.435).
CONCLUSION: Higher all-cause mortality in older CRT-P versus CRT-D patients is largely explained by baseline clinical and demographic differences between the two groups, which are likely the drivers of device selection in real-world clinical practice, where the published guidelines remain ambiguous. There is a need for randomized studies to determine optimal CRT device selection.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Age FactorsAgedAged, 80 and overCardiac Resynchronization TherapyCardiac Resynchronization Therapy DevicesDefibrillators, ImplantableElectric CountershockFemaleHeart FailureHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMultivariate AnalysisPropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsProsthesis DesignRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsStroke VolumeTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVentricular Function, Left