Age-Stratified Clinical Outcome in Patients with Known Heart Failure Who Receive Pacemaker, Resynchronization Therapy, or Defibrillator Implants
- PMID: 38555639
- PMCID: PMC11449187
- DOI: 10.1159/000538529
Age-Stratified Clinical Outcome in Patients with Known Heart Failure Who Receive Pacemaker, Resynchronization Therapy, or Defibrillator Implants
Abstract
Introduction: Patients with heart failure (HF) and bradycardia may be eligible for different types of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), depending on the presence of atrioventricular conduction disease, age, and comorbidities. We aimed to assess the prognosis for these patients, after CIED implantation, stratified for the type of CIED device.
Methods: All patients with preexisting HF diagnosis who received a CIED with a right ventricular lead during the period 2005-2018 in Sweden were identified via the pacemaker registry. Data were crossmatched with the population registry and national disease registries. The outcome was 5-year risk of HF hospitalization and mortality.
Results: A total of 37,745 patients were included in the study. Comparing demographics for implantable cardioverter defibrillator versus pacemaker implants, median age was 66 years versus 83 years, 20% versus 41% were female, 64% versus 50% had ischemic heart disease, and 35% versus 67% had atrial fibrillation (all p < 0.001). Five-year mortality was highest in single-chamber pacemaker recipients (61% compared to average 40%, p < 0.001), but the proportion of cardiovascular mortality was highest for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients (68% vs. 63% p < 0.001). Adjusted mortality was higher for pacemaker patients in all age decile groups (ranging from <60 to >90 years old, all p < 0.001), HF hospitalization occurred in 28% (dual-chamber pacemaker) to 39% (CRT-P) of patients, and cause of death was HF in 15% (dual-chamber pacemaker) to 25% (CRT-D), all p < 0.001.
Conclusion: In this large real-world cohort of CIED-treated patients with prior HF, demography and mortality data indicate that clinicians chose devices according to the overall status of the patient. HF-related events occurred in all groups but were more common in CRT-treated patients.
Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Heart failure; Pacemaker; Prognosis.
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.
Conflict of interest statement
R.B. has received speaker’s fees from Medtronic, Abbott, and Biotronik, has research grants from Boston Scientific, and is currently an employee of the non-profit Novo Nordisk Foundation. The other authors have no conflicts of interests.
Figures




Similar articles
-
Use and Outcomes of Dual Chamber or Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Defibrillators Among Older Patients Requiring Ventricular Pacing in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Registry.JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jan 4;4(1):e2035470. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.35470. JAMA Netw Open. 2021. PMID: 33496796 Free PMC article.
-
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.
-
Cardiac implantable electrical devices in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: single center implant data extracted from the Swedish pacemaker and ICD registry.Scand Cardiovasc J. 2020 Aug;54(4):239-247. doi: 10.1080/14017431.2020.1727000. Epub 2020 Feb 13. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2020. PMID: 32054352
-
Economic Considerations of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices for The Treatment of Heart Failure.Curr Heart Fail Rep. 2024 Jun;21(3):186-193. doi: 10.1007/s11897-024-00664-y. Epub 2024 Apr 25. Curr Heart Fail Rep. 2024. PMID: 38662154 Review.
-
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Therapy: Permanent Pacemakers, Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators, and Cardiac Resynchronization Devices.Med Clin North Am. 2019 Sep;103(5):931-943. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2019.04.005. Epub 2019 Jul 5. Med Clin North Am. 2019. PMID: 31378335 Review.
Cited by
-
Does Age Play a Role in Patients with Heart Failure Receiving Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices?Cardiology. 2024;149(5):484-486. doi: 10.1159/000538631. Epub 2024 May 17. Cardiology. 2024. PMID: 38763128 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Long-term adherence to a wearable for continuous behavioural activity measuring in the SafeHeart implantable cardioverter defibrillator population.Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2024 Aug 1;5(5):622-632. doi: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztae055. eCollection 2024 Sep. Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2024. PMID: 39318686 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Glikson M, Nielsen JC, Kronborg MB, Michowitz Y, Auricchio A, Barbash IM, et al. . 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(35):3427–520. - PubMed
-
- Kusumoto FM, Schoenfeld MH, Barrett C, Edgerton JR, Ellenbogen KA, Gold MR, et al. . 2018 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline on the evaluation and management of patients with bradycardia and cardiac conduction delay: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on clinical practice guidelines and the heart rhythm society. Circulation. 2019;140(8):e382–482. - PubMed
-
- Tops LF, Schalij MJ, Bax JJ. The effects of right ventricular apical pacing on ventricular function and dyssynchrony implications for therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(9):764–76. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous