BACKGROUND: QRS duration (QRSd) may be impacted by both left ventricular (LV) dilatation and conduction delay. It is possible therefore that the same QRSd may portend significantly different amounts of LV activation delay in patients with small versus large left ventricles. We hypothesized that LV size modifies the effect of QRSd on predicting outcomes in patients undergoing CRT implant. METHODS: We extracted data on consecutive patients presenting for initial CRT implant. In patients with a follow-up echocardiogram, response was defined as an absolute improvement in LV ejection fraction ≥5%. Multivariate models were created to determine if left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) modified the effect of QRSd on its association with both long-term survival free of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and heart transplant and echocardiographic response. RESULTS: 464 patients met inclusion criteria. At a mean follow-up of 4.9 ± 2.6 years, there were 210 deaths, 13 heart transplants, and 12 LVAD placements. There was a weak but significant correlation between baseline QRSd and LVEDD (Spearman's Rho 0.106, P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, there was no evidence of effect modification of LVEDD on QRSd (LVEDDi*QRS interaction term HR 1.0 [0.995-1.006], P = 0.94). Note that 305 patients had a follow-up echocardiogram, of whom 193 met the criteria for response. In a multivariate analysis, there was no evidence of effect modification of LVEDD on QRSd (LVEDDi*QRS interaction term odds ratio 0.998 (0.988-1.008), P = 0.65). CONCLUSION: LV size does not modify the effect of QRSd and its association with outcomes following CRT. The correlation between LV size and QRSd in patients with a QRSd ≥ 120 ms is weak.
BACKGROUND: QRS duration (QRSd) may be impacted by both left ventricular (LV) dilatation and conduction delay. It is possible therefore that the same QRSd may portend significantly different amounts of LV activation delay in patients with small versus large left ventricles. We hypothesized that LV size modifies the effect of QRSd on predicting outcomes in patients undergoing CRT implant. METHODS: We extracted data on consecutive patients presenting for initial CRT implant. In patients with a follow-up echocardiogram, response was defined as an absolute improvement in LV ejection fraction ≥5%. Multivariate models were created to determine if left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) modified the effect of QRSd on its association with both long-term survival free of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and heart transplant and echocardiographic response. RESULTS: 464 patients met inclusion criteria. At a mean follow-up of 4.9 ± 2.6 years, there were 210 deaths, 13 heart transplants, and 12 LVAD placements. There was a weak but significant correlation between baseline QRSd and LVEDD (Spearman's Rho 0.106, P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, there was no evidence of effect modification of LVEDD on QRSd (LVEDDi*QRS interaction term HR 1.0 [0.995-1.006], P = 0.94). Note that 305 patients had a follow-up echocardiogram, of whom 193 met the criteria for response. In a multivariate analysis, there was no evidence of effect modification of LVEDD on QRSd (LVEDDi*QRS interaction term odds ratio 0.998 (0.988-1.008), P = 0.65). CONCLUSION: LV size does not modify the effect of QRSd and its association with outcomes following CRT. The correlation between LV size and QRSd in patients with a QRSd ≥ 120 ms is weak.
Authors: Stian Ross; Hans Henrik Odland; Trent Fischer; Thor Edvardsen; Lars Ove Gammelsrud; Trine Fink Haland; Richard Cornelussen; Einar Hopp; Erik Kongsgaard Journal: Open Heart Date: 2018-12-10
Authors: Hans Henrik Odland; Manuel Villegas-Martinez; Stian Ross; Torbjørn Holm; Richard Cornelussen; Espen W Remme; Erik Kongsgard Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2021-09-12