Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Implications of ventricular arrhythmia after cardiac resynchronization therapy
Authors' conclusion
VA occurrence within 1 year was related to paced electrical delay and poor response to CRT. VA could be associated with poor prognosis among CRT patients.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices, within 1 year after implantation
- Participants
- 330 patients
- Exposure
- Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) vs no VA within 1 year after CRT implantation
- VAn = 43
- Outcome
- All-cause death or HF hospitalisation
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
- VA associated with significantly higher risk of primary endpoint, even among CRT responders
- P = .009
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary endpoint, fastvs slow VA | 2.14 (1.06–4.34) | P = 0.035 | |
| Primary endpoint, shock therapyvs antitachycardia pacing | 1.49 (0.73–3.03) | P = 0.269 | |
| 0.20.5125Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Response to CRT
P = 0.031
LV paced conduction time
P = 0.003
Original publication
Implications of ventricular arrhythmia after cardiac resynchronization therapy. Heart Rhythm. Published 20 September 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →