PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 2, 2012European Journal of Heart Failure155 citationsOpen Access

Long-Term Mortality with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in the Cardiac Resynchronization-Heart Failure (CARE-HF) Trial

View Full Paper
JCJohn G.F. ClelandNFNick FreemantleEEErland Erdmann

Key Result

Cardiac resynchronization therapy significantly reduced long-term mortality compared with pharmacological therapy in patients with heart failure (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.63-0.93; P=0.007).

Study Design

Type

RCT (n=813)

Structured PICO

Does cardiac resynchronization therapy reduce long-term mortality in selected patients with heart failure?

P
Population
813 selected patients with heart failure originally enrolled in the CARE-HF trial
I
Intervention
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)
C
Comparator
Pharmacological therapy (control group), with >95% of survivors receiving CRT by the time of re-consent
O
Outcome
Long-term mortalityhard clinical

The mortality benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure patients persists during long-term follow-up despite high crossover rates in the control group.

Main Result

Effect estimate: HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.63-0.93)

p-value: p=0.007

Limitations

  • A high rate of CRT device implantation in the control group after completion of the randomized phase of the study may have prevented further divergence of the survival curves.

Abstract

AIMS: The Cardiac Resynchronization-Heart Failure (CARE-HF) study helped establish an important role for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in the management of selected patients with heart failure. We now report the long-term outcome during and subsequent to the randomized trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Enrollment was completed in March 2003. After reporting the main study results in 2005, investigators were asked to inform patients of the results and implant a CRT device if still appropriate. Subsequently, investigators were asked to consent patients for long-term follow-up until 30 September 2009. Of 813 patients originally enrolled, 343 (42%) died prior to re-consent, 111 patients (14%) were not or could not be contacted, 50 (6%) were alive but declined to participate, and 309 (38%) consented to long-term follow-up. Of patients originally assigned to the control group, > 95% of survivors had received CRT by the time of re-consent. From the time of randomization, 222 patients originally assigned to pharmacological therapy and 192 originally assigned to CRT were known to have died. The hazard ratio for mortality in patients originally assigned to CRT compared with those originally assigned to the control group was 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.63-0.93; P = 0.007). No subgroup interactions were observed. CONCLUSION: The effect of CRT on mortality observed during the randomized CARE-HF trial persisted during long-term follow-up. A high rate of CRT device implantation in the control group after completion of the randomized phase of the study may have prevented further divergence of the survival curves.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Cleland et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=813). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) vs. Pharmacological therapy (control group) was evaluated on Mortality (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.93, p=0.007). Cardiac resynchronization therapy significantly reduced long-term mortality compared with pharmacological therapy in patients with heart failure (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.63-0.93; P=0.007).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a156b5337103a43379fb6d9https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjhf/hfs055
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper