Key result
This review discusses the procedural-related complications and response rates of cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrades compared to de novo implantations, highlighting the need for careful patient selection.
Why the study?
Do CRT upgrades have different procedural-related complication rates compared to de novo CRT implantations?
Do CRT upgrades have different procedural-related complication rates compared to de novo CRT implantations?
Understanding the relative risks of CRT upgrades versus de novo implantations is important to help operators select the correct initial device and counsel patients.
CRT upgrades warrant cautious patient selection given uncertain risks versus de novo; leaves open need for prospective comparisons.
INTRODUCTION: A significant number of patients undergo upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). These patients tend to differ from individuals undergoing de novo CRT implantations both in terms of their baseline demographics and the etiology underlying their heart failure. Areas covered: There are several factors that need to be considered when upgrading patients to CRT, such as, venous patency. Potentially, these conditions can cause issues which may result in procedures being more difficult than de novo implantations. This article discusses these issues and compares the rates of procedural-related complications for CRT upgrades and de novo implantations. It discusses the proportion of patients that are likely to respond to CRT with each intervention. Expert commentary: Understanding the relative risks of CRT upgrades versus de novo implantations is important to help operators select the correct initial device and counsel patients accordingly. Growing experience with image-guided implantations and endocardial pacing may prove to be particularly relevant to patients undergoing CRT upgrades.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sidhu et al. (2018) conducted a review in Heart failure requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) upgrades vs. De novo CRT implantations was evaluated on Procedural-related complications and response rates. This review discusses the procedural-related complications and response rates of cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrades compared to de novo implantations, highlighting the need for careful patient selection.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: