Neal A Chatterjee1, Attila Roka1, Steven A Lubitz1, Michael R Gold2, Claude Daubert3, Cecilia Linde4, Jan Steffel5, Jagmeet P Singh1, Theofanie Mela6. 1. Department of Medicine and the Cardiac Arrhythmia Service, GRB 109, Massachusetts General Hospital Heart Center, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02411, USA. 2. Division of Cardiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 3. Cardiology Division, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France. 4. Department of Cardiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 6. Department of Medicine and the Cardiac Arrhythmia Service, GRB 109, Massachusetts General Hospital Heart Center, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02411, USA tmela@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
AIMS: For patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD; CRT-D), the effect of an improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on appropriate ICD therapy may have significant implications regarding management at the time of ICD generator replacement. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the effect of LVEF recovery following CRT on the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy. A search of multiple electronic databases identified 709 reports, of which 6 retrospective cohort studies were included (n = 1740). In patients with post-CRT LVEF ≥35% (study n = 4), the pooled estimated rate of ICD therapy (5.5/100 person-years) was significantly lower than patients with post-CRT LVEF <35% [incidence rate difference (IRD): -6.5/100 person-years, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -8.8 to -4.2, P < 0.001]. Similarly, patients with post-CRT LVEF ≥45% (study n = 4) demonstrated lower estimated rates of ICD therapy (2.3/100 person-years) compared with patients without such recovery (IRD: -5.8/100 person-years, 95% CI: -7.6 to -4.0, P < 0.001). Restricting analysis to studies discounting ICD therapies during LVEF recovery (study n = 3), patients with LVEF recovery (≥35 or ≥45%) had significantly lower rates of ICD therapy compared with patients without such recovery (P for both <0.001). Patients with primary prevention indication for ICD, regardless of LVEF recovery definition, had very low rates of ICD therapy (0.4 to 0.8/100-person years). CONCLUSION: Recovery of LVEF post-CRT is associated with significantly reduced appropriate ICD therapy. Patients with improvement of LVEF ≥45% and those with primary prevention indication for ICD appear to be at lowest risk. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: For patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD; CRT-D), the effect of an improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on appropriate ICD therapy may have significant implications regarding management at the time of ICD generator replacement. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the effect of LVEF recovery following CRT on the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy. A search of multiple electronic databases identified 709 reports, of which 6 retrospective cohort studies were included (n = 1740). In patients with post-CRT LVEF ≥35% (study n = 4), the pooled estimated rate of ICD therapy (5.5/100 person-years) was significantly lower than patients with post-CRT LVEF <35% [incidence rate difference (IRD): -6.5/100 person-years, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -8.8 to -4.2, P < 0.001]. Similarly, patients with post-CRT LVEF ≥45% (study n = 4) demonstrated lower estimated rates of ICD therapy (2.3/100 person-years) compared with patients without such recovery (IRD: -5.8/100 person-years, 95% CI: -7.6 to -4.0, P < 0.001). Restricting analysis to studies discounting ICD therapies during LVEF recovery (study n = 3), patients with LVEF recovery (≥35 or ≥45%) had significantly lower rates of ICD therapy compared with patients without such recovery (P for both <0.001). Patients with primary prevention indication for ICD, regardless of LVEF recovery definition, had very low rates of ICD therapy (0.4 to 0.8/100-person years). CONCLUSION: Recovery of LVEF post-CRT is associated with significantly reduced appropriate ICD therapy. Patients with improvement of LVEF ≥45% and those with primary prevention indication for ICD appear to be at lowest risk. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Jonathan A C Sterne; Peter Jüni; Kenneth F Schulz; Douglas G Altman; Christopher Bartlett; Matthias Egger Journal: Stat Med Date: 2002-06-15 Impact factor: 2.373
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: Michael R Gold; Jean-Claude Daubert; William T Abraham; Christian Hassager; Jay L Dinerman; J Harrison Hudnall; Jeff Cerkvenik; Cecilia Linde Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2013-10-14
Authors: D F Stroup; J A Berlin; S C Morton; I Olkin; G D Williamson; D Rennie; D Moher; B J Becker; T A Sipe; S B Thacker Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-04-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Martin H Ruwald; Scott D Solomon; Elyse Foster; Valentina Kutyifa; Anne-Christine Ruwald; Saadia Sherazi; Scott McNitt; Christian Jons; Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Axel Kloppe; Alessandro Proclemer; Angel Arenal; Maurizio Lunati; José Bautista Martìnez Ferrer; Ahmad Hersi; Marcin Gulaj; Maurits C E F Wijffels; Elisabetta Santi; Laura Manotta; Lorenza Mangoni; Maurizio Gasparini Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-05-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Yiyi Zhang; Eliseo Guallar; Robert G Weiss; Michael Stillabower; Gary Gerstenblith; Gordon F Tomaselli; Katherine C Wu Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2016-04-19 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Abdul Ghani; Peter Paul H M Delnoy; Ahmet Adiyaman; Jan Paul Ottervanger; Anand R Ramdat Misier; Jaap Jan J Smit; Arif Elvan Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 2.882