Charlotta Lindvall1, Neal A Chatterjee2, Yuchiao Chang2, Betty Chernack2, Vicki A Jackson2, Jagmeet P Singh2, Joshua P Metlay2. 1. From Divisions of Palliative Care (C.L., V.A.J.), General Internal Medicine (C.L., Y.C., J.P.M.), and Cardiology (N.A.C., J.P.S.), Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA and Harvard Medical School (C.L., Y.C., B.C., V.A.J., J.P.S., J.P.M.), Boston, MA. clindvall@mgh.harvard.edu. 2. From Divisions of Palliative Care (C.L., V.A.J.), General Internal Medicine (C.L., Y.C., J.P.M.), and Cardiology (N.A.C., J.P.S.), Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA and Harvard Medical School (C.L., Y.C., B.C., V.A.J., J.P.S., J.P.M.), Boston, MA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Candidates for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) receive either a biventricular pacemaker or a biventricular pacemaker with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D). Optimal device selection remains challenging because the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy may not be uniform, particularly in patients at competing risk of nonsudden death. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this serial cross-sectional study using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified 311,086 admissions associated with CRT implant between 2006 to 2012. CRT-D was the most common device type (86.1%), including in patients ≥ 75 years of age with ≥ 5 Elixhauser comorbidities (75.5%). Multivariate predictors of CRT-D implant included demographic, clinical, and geographic factors: prior ventricular arrhythmia (rate ratio [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.13-1.14), ischemic heart disease (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.10-1.11), male sex (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.09-1.10), black race (RR, 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04-1.07), and Northeast geographic region (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.09). There was significant interhospital variation in the use of CRT-D (10-90 percentile range, 72.9%-98.0% CRT-D). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients in this contemporary US cohort underwent implantation of CRT-D. Predictors of CRT-D implant included demographic, clinical, and geographic factors. In patient subgroups predicted to have an attenuated benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy (older adults with multiple comorbidities), CRT-D remained the dominant device type. An improved understanding of the determinants of device selection may aid in decision making and ultimately better align patient risk with device benefit at the time of CRT implantation.
BACKGROUND: Candidates for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) receive either a biventricular pacemaker or a biventricular pacemaker with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D). Optimal device selection remains challenging because the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy may not be uniform, particularly in patients at competing risk of nonsudden death. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this serial cross-sectional study using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified 311,086 admissions associated with CRT implant between 2006 to 2012. CRT-D was the most common device type (86.1%), including in patients ≥ 75 years of age with ≥ 5 Elixhauser comorbidities (75.5%). Multivariate predictors of CRT-D implant included demographic, clinical, and geographic factors: prior ventricular arrhythmia (rate ratio [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.13-1.14), ischemic heart disease (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.10-1.11), male sex (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.09-1.10), black race (RR, 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04-1.07), and Northeast geographic region (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.09). There was significant interhospital variation in the use of CRT-D (10-90 percentile range, 72.9%-98.0% CRT-D). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients in this contemporary US cohort underwent implantation of CRT-D. Predictors of CRT-D implant included demographic, clinical, and geographic factors. In patient subgroups predicted to have an attenuated benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy (older adults with multiple comorbidities), CRT-D remained the dominant device type. An improved understanding of the determinants of device selection may aid in decision making and ultimately better align patient risk with device benefit at the time of CRT implantation.
Authors: Dan D Matlock; Pamela N Peterson; Paul A Heidenreich; F Lee Lucas; David J Malenka; Yongfei Wang; Jeptha P Curtis; Jean S Kutner; Elliott S Fisher; Frederick A Masoudi Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2010-12-07
Authors: Ilan Goldenberg; Anant K Vyas; W Jackson Hall; Arthur J Moss; Hongyue Wang; Hua He; Wojciech Zareba; Scott McNitt; Mark L Andrews Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Andrew E Epstein; John P DiMarco; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; N A Mark Estes; Roger A Freedman; Leonard S Gettes; A Marc Gillinov; Gabriel Gregoratos; Stephen C Hammill; David L Hayes; Mark A Hlatky; L Kristin Newby; Richard L Page; Mark H Schoenfeld; Michael J Silka; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Michael O Sweeney; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; Christopher E Buller; Mark A Creager; Steven M Ettinger; David P Faxon; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon A Hunt; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Bruce W Lytle; Rick A Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel; Lynn G Tarkington; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Olujimi A Ajijola; Eric A Macklin; Stephanie A Moore; David McCarty; Kara E Bischoff; Edwin Kevin Heist; Michael Picard; Jeremy N Ruskin; George William Dec; Jagmeet P Singh Journal: Europace Date: 2010-09-18 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Benjamin A Steinberg; Sana M Al-Khatib; Rex Edwards; JooYoon Han; Gust H Bardy; J Thomas Bigger; Alfred E Buxton; Arthur J Moss; Kerry L Lee; Richard Steinman; Paul Dorian; Alfred Hallstrom; Riccardo Cappato; Alan H Kadish; Peter J Kudenchuk; Daniel B Mark; Lurdes Y T Inoue; Gillian D Sanders Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Seyed Mohammadreza Hosseini; Kasra Moazzami; Guy Rozen; Jeena Vaid; Ahmed Saleh; Kevin E Heist; Mark Vangel; Jeremy N Ruskin Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Vaibhav R Vaidya; Roshini Asirvatham; Gurukripa N Kowlgi; Ming-Yan Dai; Jordan J Cochuyt; David O Hodge; Abhishek J Deshmukh; Yong Mei Cha Journal: JACC Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2021-08-25
Authors: Niraj Varma; Suneet Mittal; Julie B Prillinger; Jeff Snell; Nirav Dalal; Jonathan P Piccini Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Laura A Hatfield; Daniel B Kramer; Rita Volya; Matthew R Reynolds; Sharon-Lise T Normand Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Jordana K Schmier; Edmund C Lau; Jasmine D Patel; Juergen A Klenk; Arnold J Greenspon Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 1.900