Left ventricular dimensions predict risk of appropriate shocks but not mortality in cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator recipients with left bundle-branch block and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy
- PMID: 27856539
- DOI: 10.1093/europace/euw323
Left ventricular dimensions predict risk of appropriate shocks but not mortality in cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator recipients with left bundle-branch block and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy
Abstract
Aims: Patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and left bundle-branch block (LBBB) often benefit markedly from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Cardiac resynchronization therapy responders have a lower risk of appropriate device shocks from CRT-defibrillators (CRT-D) than do non-responders. Larger baseline left ventricular (LV) dimensions may be associated with less CRT response and thus greater risk of appropriate shocks.
Methods and results: We analysed all (n = 249; 55% female) primary prevention CRT-D recipients at our institution with LBBB, NICM, and measured LV dimensions prior to device implant for the outcomes of (i) appropriate shocks, (ii) any appropriate tachyarrhythmia therapies, and (iii) risk of death, transplant, or left ventricular assist device (LVAD). During 59 months (interquartile range 21.5-91.5) follow-up, 19 (8%) patients received ≥1 appropriate shock, and 67 (27%) patients died, received a transplant, or required LVAD. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis of LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) per meter height vs. appropriate shock(s) revealed an area under the curve of 0.75 (95% CI 0.65-0.85; P < 0.001). No patient with indexed LVEDD <3.36 cm/m (n = 76) received a shock. There was no statistically significant difference in risk of death, transplant, or LVAD (corrected HR 1.67, 95% CI 0.90-3.03; P = 0.103) in patients with indexed LVEDD above this cut-off compared to those with smaller dimension. Among 102 patients with paired quantitative echocardiograms, there was no difference in LVEF change between patients with indexed LVEDD <3.36 cm/m (n = 27; median 11%) and larger (n = 75; median 14%).
Conclusion: Patients with LVEDD <3.36 cm/m height prior to CRT-D implant in the setting of NICM and LBBB have minimal risk of appropriate shocks but similar risk of death, transplant- and LVAD and similar extent of LV functional improvement as patients with larger LVEDD. CRT-pacemakers may be appropriate in such patients.
Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization; Echocardiography; Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; Left bundle-branch block; Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy.
Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Similar articles
-
Risk factors and the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy on cardiac and non-cardiac mortality in MADIT-CRT.Europace. 2015 Dec;17(12):1816-22. doi: 10.1093/europace/euv201. Epub 2015 Jun 11. Europace. 2015. PMID: 26071234 Clinical Trial.
-
PR interval identifies clinical response in patients with non-left bundle branch block: a Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy substudy.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014 Aug;7(4):645-51. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.113.001299. Epub 2014 Jun 24. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014. PMID: 24963007 Clinical Trial.
-
Sex Differences in Long-Term Outcomes With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Mild Heart Failure Patients With Left Bundle Branch Block.J Am Heart Assoc. 2015 Jun 29;4(7):e002013. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002013. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015. PMID: 26124205 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Importance of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Back-Up in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.J Am Heart Assoc. 2015 Nov 6;4(11):e002539. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002539. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015. PMID: 26546574 Free PMC article.
-
Cause-of-death analysis in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without a defibrillator: a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis.Europace. 2018 Mar 1;20(3):481-491. doi: 10.1093/europace/eux094. Europace. 2018. PMID: 28666319
Cited by
-
What causes sudden death in patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction?Eur Heart J. 2020 May 7;41(18):1757-1763. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz553. Eur Heart J. 2020. PMID: 31390006 Free PMC article.
-
[Continuation of ICD treatment at the time of device exchange without adequate treatment?].Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol. 2019 Jun;30(2):191-196. doi: 10.1007/s00399-019-0621-3. Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol. 2019. PMID: 31001686 Review. German.
-
Myocardial recovery after cardiac resynchronization therapy in left bundle branch block-associated idiopathic nonischemic cardiomyopathy: A NEOLITH II substudy.Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2019 Mar;24(2):e12603. doi: 10.1111/anec.12603. Epub 2018 Sep 28. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2019. PMID: 30267454 Free PMC article.
-
Combination of Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Diameter and QRS Duration Strongly Predicts Good Response to and Prognosis of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Cardiol Res Pract. 2020 Jan 17;2020:1257578. doi: 10.1155/2020/1257578. eCollection 2020. Cardiol Res Pract. 2020. PMID: 32411441 Free PMC article.
-
Prognostic Implications of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Diameter on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with ICD.J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2022 Nov 28;9(12):421. doi: 10.3390/jcdd9120421. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2022. PMID: 36547418 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials