AIMS: Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure, a significant minority of patients do not respond adequately to this therapy. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of a 'multidisciplinary care' (MC) approach on the clinical outcome in CRT patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The clinical outcome in patients prospectively receiving MC (n = 254) was compared with a control group of patients who received conventional care (CC, n = 173). The MC group was followed prospectively in an integrated clinic setting by a team of subspecialists from the heart failure, electrophysiology, and echocardiography service at 1-, 3-, and 6-months post-implant. All patients had echocardiographic-guided optimization at their 1-month visit. The proportional hazards model (adjusting for all covariates) and Kaplan-Meier time to first event curves were compared between the two groups, over a 2-year follow-up. The long-term outcome was measured as a combined endpoint of heart failure hospitalization, cardiac transplantation, or all-cause mortality. The clinical characteristics between the MC and CC groups at baseline were comparable (age, 68 ± 13 vs. 69 ± 12; NYHA III, 90 vs. 82%; ischaemic cardiomyopathy 55 vs. 64%, P = NS, respectively). The event-free survival was significantly higher in the multidisciplinary vs. the CC group (P = 0.0015). A significant reduction in clinical events was noted in the MC group vs. the CC group (hazard ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.46-0.83, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Integrated MC may improve 2-year event-free survival in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. Prospective randomized studies are needed to validate our findings.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure, a significant minority of patients do not respond adequately to this therapy. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of a 'multidisciplinary care' (MC) approach on the clinical outcome in CRT patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The clinical outcome in patients prospectively receiving MC (n = 254) was compared with a control group of patients who received conventional care (CC, n = 173). The MC group was followed prospectively in an integrated clinic setting by a team of subspecialists from the heart failure, electrophysiology, and echocardiography service at 1-, 3-, and 6-months post-implant. All patients had echocardiographic-guided optimization at their 1-month visit. The proportional hazards model (adjusting for all covariates) and Kaplan-Meier time to first event curves were compared between the two groups, over a 2-year follow-up. The long-term outcome was measured as a combined endpoint of heart failure hospitalization, cardiac transplantation, or all-cause mortality. The clinical characteristics between the MC and CC groups at baseline were comparable (age, 68 ± 13 vs. 69 ± 12; NYHA III, 90 vs. 82%; ischaemic cardiomyopathy 55 vs. 64%, P = NS, respectively). The event-free survival was significantly higher in the multidisciplinary vs. the CC group (P = 0.0015). A significant reduction in clinical events was noted in the MC group vs. the CC group (hazard ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.46-0.83, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Integrated MC may improve 2-year event-free survival in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. Prospective randomized studies are needed to validate our findings.
Authors: Michael R Bristow; Leslie A Saxon; John Boehmer; Steven Krueger; David A Kass; Teresa De Marco; Peter Carson; Lorenzo DiCarlo; David DeMets; Bill G White; Dale W DeVries; Arthur M Feldman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jagmeet P Singh; Helmut U Klein; David T Huang; Sven Reek; Malte Kuniss; Aurelio Quesada; Alon Barsheshet; David Cannom; Ilan Goldenberg; Scott McNitt; James P Daubert; Wojciech Zareba; Arthur J Moss Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-03-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Angelo Auricchio; Jiang Ding; Julio C Spinelli; Andrew P Kramer; Rodney W Salo; Walter Hoersch; Bruce H KenKnight; Helmut U Klein Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-04-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: John G F Cleland; Jean-Claude Daubert; Erland Erdmann; Nick Freemantle; Daniel Gras; Lukas Kappenberger; Luigi Tavazzi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M A Pfeffer; E Braunwald; L A Moyé; L Basta; E J Brown; T E Cuddy; B R Davis; E M Geltman; S Goldman; G C Flaker Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1992-09-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: F Waagstein; M R Bristow; K Swedberg; F Camerini; M B Fowler; M A Silver; E M Gilbert; M R Johnson; F G Goss; A Hjalmarson Journal: Lancet Date: 1993-12-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Neal A Chatterjee; Jagmeet P Singh; Jackie Szymonifka; Roderick C Deaño; Wai-Ee Thai; Bryan Wai; James K Min; James L Januzzi; Quynh A Truong Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2015-12-11 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Mi Young Park; Robert K Altman; Mary Orencole; Prabhat Kumar; Kimberly A Parks; Kevin E Heist; Jagmeet P Singh; Michael H Picard Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2012-08-09 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Quynh A Truong; James L Januzzi; Jackie Szymonifka; Wai-ee Thai; Bryan Wai; Zachary Lavender; Umesh Sharma; Ryan M Sandoval; Zachary S Grunau; Sandeep Basnet; Adefolakemi Babatunde; Olujimi A Ajijola; James K Min; Jagmeet P Singh Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 6.343