Literature DB >> 23449428

The influence of left ventricular ejection fraction on the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy: MADIT-CRT (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy).

Valentina Kutyifa1, Axel Kloppe, Wojciech Zareba, Scott D Solomon, Scott McNitt, Slava Polonsky, Alon Barsheshet, Bela Merkely, Bernd Lemke, Vivien Klaudia Nagy, Arthur J Moss, Ilan Goldenberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction and clinical outcome to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in mild heart failure patients enrolled in MADIT-CRT [corrected].
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a surrogate marker of heart failure (HF) status and associated risk. Data on the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) in patients with mild HF and better LVEF are limited.
METHODS: In the MADIT-CRT (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) study, the echocardiography core laboratory assessed baseline LVEF independent of the enrolling centers and identified a range of LVEFs, including those >30% (i.e., beyond the eligibility criteria). Echocardiographic response with CRT, defined as percent change in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), was analyzed in 3 prespecified LVEF groups: >30%, 26% to 30%, and ≤25%. The primary endpoint was HF or death. Secondary endpoint included all-cause mortality.
RESULTS: LVEF was evaluated in 1,809 study patients. There were 696 (38%) patients with LVEF >30% (in the range of 30.1% to 45.3%); 914 patients (50.5%) with LVEF 26% to 30%; and 199 patients with LVEF ≤25% (11%). The mean reduction in LVEDV with CRT-D therapy at the 1-year follow-up was directly related to increasing LVEF (LVEF >30%: 22.3%; LVEF 26% to 30%: 20.1%; and LVEF ≤25%: 18.7% reduction, respectively [p = 0.001]). CRT-D treatment similarly reduced the risk of HF/death in patients with LVEF >30% (hazard ratio [HR]: = 0.56 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.39 to 0.82], p = 0.003), LVEF 26% to 30% (HR: 0.67: [95% CI: 0.50 to 0.90], p = 0.007), and LVEF ≤25% (HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.35 to 0.95], p = 0.03; all p values for LVEF-by-treatment interactions >0.1).
CONCLUSIONS: In MADIT-CRT, the clinical benefit of CRT was evident regardless of baseline LVEF, including those with LVEF >30%, whereas the echocardiographic response was increased with increasing LVEF, indicating that CRT might benefit patients with better LVEF. (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy [MADIT-CRT]; NCT00180271).
Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23449428     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.11.051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  22 in total

1.  Effect of periodic pacemaker optimization on left atrial reverse remodeling in long-term cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Guangwei Pan; Zhiqiang Liu; Pengyi He; Yuchun Yang; Yuming Mu; Wei Han; Muhuyati Wulasihan
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 2.  Roles and indications for use of implantable defibrillator and resynchronization therapy in the prevention of sudden cardiac death in heart failure.

Authors:  Yitschak Biton; Jayson R Baman; Bronislava Polonsky
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.214

Review 3.  Left ventricular ejection fraction as therapeutic target: is it the ideal marker?

Authors:  V Katsi; G Georgiopoulos; A Laina; E Koutli; J Parissis; C Tsioufis; P Nihoyannopoulos; D Tousoulis
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 4.214

4.  Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: The Optimal QRS Duration Revisited.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2016-08

Review 5.  Update on Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy for Heart Failure.

Authors:  David D Daly; Michael R Gold
Journal:  Eur Cardiol       Date:  2014-12

6.  Noninvasive Measures of Ventricular-Arterial Coupling and Circumferential Strain Predict Cancer Therapeutics-Related Cardiac Dysfunction.

Authors:  Hari K Narayan; Benjamin French; Abigail M Khan; Theodore Plappert; David Hyman; Akinyemi Bajulaiye; Susan Domchek; Angela DeMichele; Amy Clark; Jennifer Matro; Angela Bradbury; Kevin Fox; Joseph R Carver; Bonnie Ky
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2016-04-13

7.  One-point carotid wave intensity predicts cardiac mortality in patients with congestive heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

Authors:  Olga Vriz; Marco Pellegrinet; Concetta Zito; Vitantonio di Bello; Manola Bettio; Scipione Carerj; Antonello Cittadini; Eduardo Bossone; Francesco Antonini-Canterin
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 2.357

8.  Lead one ratio in left bundle branch block predicts poor cardiac resynchronization therapy response.

Authors:  Zak Loring; Daniel J Friedman; Kasper Emerek; Claus Graff; Peter L Sørensen; Steen M Hansen; Bjorn Wieslander; Martin Ugander; Peter Søgaard; Brett D Atwater
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 1.976

9.  Serum phosphate levels reflect responses to cardiac resynchronization therapy in chronic heart failure patients.

Authors:  Yoshiyuki Kamiyama; Hitoshi Suzuki; Shinya Yamada; Takashi Kaneshiro; Yasuchika Takeishi
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2014-08-20

10.  A Critical Reappraisal of the Current Clinical Indications to Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy.

Authors:  Antonio Sorgente; Riccardo Cappato
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2013-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.