AIMS: The current study examined the degree of agreement between echocardiographic and patient-reported health status response to CRT 6 months after implantation, and evaluated the differences in pre-implantation characteristics of patients with concordant and discordant echocardiographic and health status responses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutively implanted CRT-defibrillator patients (n = 109, mean age = 65.4 ± 10.1 years, 74 men) were recruited from the University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. Prior to implantation and 6 months post-implantation, all patients underwent echocardiography and completed the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Echocardiographic response was defined as a relative reduction of ≥15% in LV end-systolic volume; an improvement of ≥10 points in KCCQ score indicated a health status response. In the 54 patients with discordant responses, 25 (22.9%) had an echocardiographic response but no health status response and 29 (26.6%) had a health status response but no echocardiographic response. Patients with concordant and discordant responses differed on various pre-implantation characteristics, including sex, employment status, LV volumes, and pre-implantation KCCQ score. In multivariable analysis, pre-implantation KCCQ score [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.88-0.95, P < 0.001] and QRS duration (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.01-1.06, P = 0.009) were the only characteristics associated with health status response to CRT. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a large discrepancy between echocardiographic and patient-reported health status response to CRT. The most important predictor of health status response was the pre-implantation health status score. These results emphasize that disease-specific health status measures may have additional value over 'objective' measures of CRT response and should be incorporated in clinical practice.
AIMS: The current study examined the degree of agreement between echocardiographic and patient-reported health status response to CRT 6 months after implantation, and evaluated the differences in pre-implantation characteristics of patients with concordant and discordant echocardiographic and health status responses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutively implanted CRT-defibrillator patients (n = 109, mean age = 65.4 ± 10.1 years, 74 men) were recruited from the University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. Prior to implantation and 6 months post-implantation, all patients underwent echocardiography and completed the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Echocardiographic response was defined as a relative reduction of ≥15% in LV end-systolic volume; an improvement of ≥10 points in KCCQ score indicated a health status response. In the 54 patients with discordant responses, 25 (22.9%) had an echocardiographic response but no health status response and 29 (26.6%) had a health status response but no echocardiographic response. Patients with concordant and discordant responses differed on various pre-implantation characteristics, including sex, employment status, LV volumes, and pre-implantation KCCQ score. In multivariable analysis, pre-implantation KCCQ score [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.88-0.95, P < 0.001] and QRS duration (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.01-1.06, P = 0.009) were the only characteristics associated with health status response to CRT. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a large discrepancy between echocardiographic and patient-reported health status response to CRT. The most important predictor of health status response was the pre-implantation health status score. These results emphasize that disease-specific health status measures may have additional value over 'objective' measures of CRT response and should be incorporated in clinical practice.
Authors: Hillary D Lum; Evan P Carey; Diane Fairclough; Mary E Plomondon; Evelyn Hutt; John S Rumsfeld; David B Bekelman Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Björn Wieslander; Zak Loring; Wojciech Zareba; Scott McNitt; Galen S Wagner; James P Daubert; David G Strauss Journal: J Electrocardiol Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 1.438
Authors: Jetske van 't Sant; Aernoud T L Fiolet; Iris A H ter Horst; Maarten J Cramer; Mirjam H Mastenbroek; Wouter M van Everdingen; Thomas P Mast; Pieter A Doevendans; Henneke Versteeg; Mathias Meine Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: W M van Everdingen; J C Schipper; J van 't Sant; K Ramdat Misier; M Meine; M J Cramer Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 2.380