Among 80,768 CRT patients, 40.7% had <98% pacing, with atrial tachycardia/fibrillation being the most common cause of pacing loss (30.6% of explained loss).
Observational (n=80,768)
What are the specific causes and relative frequencies of CRT pacing loss in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy?
Atrial tachycardia/fibrillation and inappropriately programmed AV intervals are the most common causes of suboptimal CRT pacing, highlighting actionable targets for improving CRT delivery.
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is associated with the amount of CRT pacing delivered. The specific causes of CRT pacing loss and their relative frequencies remain poorly defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: CRT patients who transmitted device data from 2006 to 2011 were screened for inclusion. Device diagnostics were analyzed using an automated algorithm to categorize CRT loss into 10 different causes. The algorithm was validated against manual adjudications using a portion of the entire cohort. There were 80 768 patients analyzed with a median time of 594 (interquartile range, 294-1003) days from implant to time of analysis. In this cohort, 40.7% of patients had 50% and premature ventricular contractions accounted for <10% of CRT loss in those with <90% CRT pacing. CONCLUSIONS: CRT pacing <98% was observed in 40.7% of patients. Among those with suboptimal pacing, atrial tachycardia/atrial fibrillation was the most common reason for CRT pacing loss. Inappropriately programmed SAV/PAV intervals was the most common reason for episodes of sustained loss of CRT pacing. This information can help in defining more effective treatments to improve CRT delivery.
Cheng et al. (Mon,) conducted a observational in Patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) (n=80,768). Causes of CRT pacing loss was evaluated on Causes of CRT pacing loss. Among 80,768 CRT patients, 40.7% had <98% pacing, with atrial tachycardia/fibrillation being the most common cause of pacing loss (30.6% of explained loss).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: