Key result
Echo dyssynchrony parameters lack validation for CRT selection while QRS duration remains the proven standard.
Why the study?
Small observational studies have promoted echocardiographic dyssynchrony parameters over QRS prolongation for selecting CRT candidates, raising concerns about their unvalidated clinical use.
Clinicians should not use echocardiographic dyssynchrony to select CRT candidates; leaves open its potential pending validation beyond QRS duration.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure. International guidelines unanimously endorse QRS prolongation to identify candidates for implantation, based on over 4,000 patients randomized in landmark trials. Small, observational, nonrandomized studies with surrogate end points have promoted echocardiography as a superior method of patient selection. Over 30 dyssynchrony parameters have been proposed. Most lack validation in appropriate clinical settings, including demonstration of short- and long-term reproducibility and intra- and interobserver variability. Prospective multicenter trials have proved informative in unexpected ways. In core laboratories, parameters exhibit striking variability, poor reproducibility, and limited predictive power. We are concerned that many centers today are using these techniques to select patients for CRT. Publication density and bias have misinformed clinical decision making. Echocardiographic parameters have no place in denying potentially life-saving treatment or in exposing patients to unnecessary risks and draining health care resources. Such measures should not stray beyond the research environment unless validated in randomized trials with robust clinical end points. The electrocardiogram remains a simple, inexpensive, and reproducible tool that identifies patients likely to benefit from CRT. Patient selection must use the parameter prospectively validated in landmark clinical trials: the QRS duration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hawkins et al. (2009) conducted a review in Heart failure. Patient selection for CRT using QRS duration vs echocardiography was evaluated. Echocardiographic dyssynchrony parameters lack validation for selecting patients for cardiac resynchronization therapy, whereas QRS duration remains the proven standard based on over 4,000 patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: