Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Ineffective cardiac resynchronization pacing is associated with poor outcomes in a nationwide cohort analysis
Authors' conclusion
Ineffective VP is associated with decreased survival.
Study context
- Population
- Patients implanted with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices with ≥30 days of follow-upfollow-up 2.1 ± 1.0 years
- Participants
- 7,987 patients
- Exposure
- Ineffective CRT pacing and %ventricular pacing (VP) vs survival
- Outcome
- Survival
- Follow-up
- 3 years
Methodological detailsnationwide, Optum EHR data set and Medtronic CareLink data warehouse
- Nationwide
- Optum EHR data set and Medtronic CareLink data warehouse
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Survival by quartile of ineffective VP
P < 0.001
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Decreased survival (multivariable Cox model)
| Estimate | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| <97.7% VP | adjusted HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.14–1.46) | P < 0.001 | |
| >2% ineffective VP | HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.18–1.54) | P < 0.001 | |
| 0.512Ratio (log scale) |
| Outcome | Values | P value |
|---|---|---|
| Survival by median %VP (97.7%)>97.7% VP vs <97.7% VP | >97.7% VP 84.2% · <97.7% VP 77.8% | P < 0.001 |
| Survival: >97.7% VP with >2% ineffective VP vs <97.7% VP with ≤2% ineffective VPSimilar survival | >97.7% VP, >2% ineffective VP 81.6% · <97.7% VP, ≤2% ineffective VP 79.4% | P = 0.54 |
Original publication
Ineffective cardiac resynchronization pacing is associated with poor outcomes in a nationwide cohort analysis. Heart Rhythm. Published 17 July 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →