Literature DB >> 15922268

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with right bundle branch block: analysis of pooled data from the MIRACLE and Contak CD trials.

Cesar A Egoavil1, Reginald T Ho, Arnold J Greenspon, Behzad B Pavri.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) have not included many patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB).
OBJECTIVES: We pooled data from two randomized controlled trials of CRT (Multicenter InSync Randomized Clinical Evaluation [MIRACLE] and Contak CD) in order to assess outcomes of patients with RBBB.
METHODS: A total of 61 patients with RBBB were identified, 34 of whom were randomized to the CRT group and 27 to the control group. The data from these patients were entered into a new database and analyzed.
RESULTS: Baseline demographics were not different between the two groups (mean age 65.5 +/- 11.3 years vs 69.5 +/- 9.6 years; male gender 91% vs 85%; patients with coronary disease 76.5% vs 88%; QRS duration 167 ms vs 164 ms; all P = NS). Outcome variables (New York Heart Association [NYHA] class, 6-minute hall walk distance, peak oxygen consumption (VO2), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure quality-of-life scores, left ventricular ejection fraction, and norepinephrine levels) were analyzed at randomization, 3 months, and 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: (1) With the exception of NYHA class, patients with RBBB as the qualifying wide QRS did not derive significant benefit from CRT in any of the other parameters studied at 3 or 6 months. (2) RBBB patients who received active CRT showed significant improvements in NYHA class by 6 months and trends toward improvement in 6-minute walk distance, quality-of-life scores, and norepinephrine levels. However, control patients also showed significant improvement in NYHA class by 6 months but showed no improvement in objective measurements (VO2, 6-minute walk distance, left ventricular ejection fraction, and norepinephrine levels), consistent with a placebo effect. Analysis of a larger cohort of patients with RBBB undergoing CRT may demonstrate significant benefit, but the current analysis does not support the use of CRT in patients with RBBB.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15922268     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2005.03.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  20 in total

Review 1.  Effect of QRS morphology on clinical event reduction with cardiac resynchronization therapy: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Ilke Sipahi; Josephine C Chou; Marshall Hyden; Douglas Y Rowland; Daniel I Simon; James C Fang
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.749

2.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy: the MGH experience.

Authors:  Jagmeet P Singh; Jeremy N Ruskin
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.468

Review 3.  Does cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit patients with right bundle branch block: left ventricular free wall pacing: seldom right for right bundle branch block.

Authors:  Kenneth C Bilchick
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2014-06

Review 4.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy: the issue of non-response.

Authors:  Luigi Padeletti; Alessandro Paoletti Perini; Edoardo Gronda
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.214

5.  [Indication for CRT].

Authors:  M Schlösser; C Stellbrink
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2009-09

Review 6.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy for patients with congenital heart disease: technical challenges.

Authors:  Meera Manchanda; Christopher J McLeod; Ammar Killu; Samuel J Asirvatham
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 1.900

7.  Early prediction of cardiac resynchronization therapy response by non-invasive electrocardiogram markers.

Authors:  Nuria Ortigosa; Víctor Pérez-Roselló; Víctor Donoso; Joaquín Osca; Luis Martínez-Dolz; Carmen Fernández; Antonio Galbis
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 8.  The determinants of clinical outcome and clinical response to CRT are not the same.

Authors:  John G F Cleland; Stefano Ghio
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.214

Review 9.  Imaging for planning of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Bobak Heydari; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-01

Review 10.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy in NYHA class IV heart failure.

Authors:  Michelle Khoo; Patricia A Kelly; JoAnn Lindenfeld
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.