Valentina Kutyifa1, Martin Stockburger2, James P Daubert2, Fredrik Holmqvist2, Brian Olshansky2, Claudio Schuger2, Helmut Klein2, Ilan Goldenberg2, Andrew Brenyo2, Scott McNitt2, Bela Merkely2, Wojciech Zareba2, Arthur J Moss2. 1. From the University of Rochester Medical Center, NY (V.K., H.K., I.G., A.B., S.M., W.Z., A.J.M.); Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a Joint Cooperation between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany (M.S.); Cardiology Department, Duke University, Durham, NC (J.P.D., F.H.); Department of Medicine, University of Iowa Health Care (B.O.); Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI (C.S.); and Semmelweis University, Heart Center, Budapest, Hungary (B.M.). Valentina.Kutyifa@heart.rochester.edu. 2. From the University of Rochester Medical Center, NY (V.K., H.K., I.G., A.B., S.M., W.Z., A.J.M.); Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a Joint Cooperation between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany (M.S.); Cardiology Department, Duke University, Durham, NC (J.P.D., F.H.); Department of Medicine, University of Iowa Health Care (B.O.); Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI (C.S.); and Semmelweis University, Heart Center, Budapest, Hungary (B.M.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT), patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch block, intraventricular conduction delay) did not have clinical benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D). We hypothesized that baseline PR interval modulates clinical response to CRT-D therapy in patients with non-LBBB. METHODS AND RESULTS:Non-LBBB patients (n=537; 30%) were divided into 2 groups based on their baseline PR interval as normal (including minimally prolonged) PR (PR <230 ms) and prolonged PR (PR ≥230 ms). The primary end point was heart failure or death. Separate secondary end points included heart failure events and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare risk of end point events by CRT-D to implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in the PR subgroups. There were 96 patients (22%) with a prolonged PR and 438 patients (78%) with a normal PR interval. In non-LBBB patients with a prolonged PR interval, CRT-D treatment was associated with a 73% reduction in the risk of heart failure/death (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.57; P<0.001) and 81% decrease in the risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.57; P<0.001) compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. In non-LBBB patients with normal PR, CRT-D therapy was associated with a trend toward an increased risk of heart failure/death (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.19; P=0.078; interaction P<0.001) and a more than 2-fold higher mortality (hazard ratio, 2.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-4.09; P=0.022; interaction P<0.001) compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The data support the use of CRT-D in MADIT-CRT non-LBBB patients with a prolonged PR interval. In non-LBBB patients with a normal PR interval, implantation of a CRT-D may be deleterious. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00180271.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT), patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch block, intraventricular conduction delay) did not have clinical benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D). We hypothesized that baseline PR interval modulates clinical response to CRT-D therapy in patients with non-LBBB. METHODS AND RESULTS: Non-LBBB patients (n=537; 30%) were divided into 2 groups based on their baseline PR interval as normal (including minimally prolonged) PR (PR <230 ms) and prolonged PR (PR ≥230 ms). The primary end point was heart failure or death. Separate secondary end points included heart failure events and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare risk of end point events by CRT-D to implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in the PR subgroups. There were 96 patients (22%) with a prolonged PR and 438 patients (78%) with a normal PR interval. In non-LBBB patients with a prolonged PR interval, CRT-D treatment was associated with a 73% reduction in the risk of heart failure/death (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.57; P<0.001) and 81% decrease in the risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.57; P<0.001) compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. In non-LBBB patients with normal PR, CRT-D therapy was associated with a trend toward an increased risk of heart failure/death (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.19; P=0.078; interaction P<0.001) and a more than 2-fold higher mortality (hazard ratio, 2.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-4.09; P=0.022; interaction P<0.001) compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The data support the use of CRT-D in MADIT-CRT non-LBBB patients with a prolonged PR interval. In non-LBBB patients with a normal PR interval, implantation of a CRT-D may be deleterious. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00180271.
Authors: Nikhil P Joshi; Matthew M Stopper; Jianqing Li; John F Beshai; Behzad B Pavri Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Daniel J Friedman; Haikun Bao; Erica S Spatz; Jeptha P Curtis; James P Daubert; Sana M Al-Khatib Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-10-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gregory S Hoeker; Mohamed A Hanafy; Robert A Oster; Donald M Bers; Steven M Pogwizd Journal: J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 3.105
Authors: Martin Stockburger; Arthur J Moss; Helmut U Klein; Wojciech Zareba; Ilan Goldenberg; Yitschak Biton; Scott McNitt; Valentina Kutyifa Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2016-06-18 Impact factor: 5.460