Key result
CRTP was associated with higher all-cause mortality compared to CRTD (11.6% vs 6.8% per patient-year; HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.63-1.76, P<0.001), except in patients >75 years with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy.
Why the study?
Guidelines lack firm recommendations on choosing between CRTP and CRTD for primary prevention, particularly in older patients.
Does CRTD reduce all-cause mortality compared to CRTP in patients with systolic chronic heart failure requiring primary prevention?
Cohort (n=45,697)
Yes
Does CRTD reduce all-cause mortality compared to CRTP in patients with systolic chronic heart failure requiring primary prevention?
Hazard Ratio: 1.7 (95% CI 1.63–1.76)
Absolute Event Rate: 11.6% vs 6.8%
p-value: p=<0.001
CRTD is associated with lower all-cause mortality compared to CRTP in primary prevention for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy under 75 years old, but offers no significant mortality benefit over CRTP in non-ischemic patients over 75.
Observational data suggest no mortality benefit from adding defibrillator to CRT in elderly NICM patients; leaves open optimal device selection pending RCTs.
AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy with (CRTD) or without (CRTP) defibrillator is recommended in selected patient with systolic chronic heart failure and wide QRS. There is no guideline firmly indicating choice between CRTP and CRTD in primary prevention, particularly in older patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on the French administrative hospital-discharge database, information was collected from 2010 to 2017 for all patients implanted with CRTP or CRTD in primary prevention. Outcome analyses were undertaken in the total study population and in propensity-matched samples. During follow-up (913 days, SD 841, median 701, IQR 151-1493), 45 697 patients were analysed (CRTP 19 266 and CRTD 26 431). Incidence rate (%patient/year) of all-cause mortality was higher in CRTP patients (11.6%) than in CRTD patients (6.8%) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63-1.76, P < 0.001]. After propensity-matched analyses, mortality of patients over 75 years old with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) was not different with CRTP and CRTD (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80-1.09, P = 0.39). The CRTP patients under 75 years old with NICM had a higher mortality than CRTD patients (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03-1.45, P = 0.02). Mortality rate was also higher with CRTP than with CRTD irrespectively of age in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) (<75 years old: HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37, P = 0.01; ≥75 years old: HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04-1.22, P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: In this real-life study, CRTD was associated with a significantly lower all-cause mortality than CRTP in patients with ICM and in patients with NICM under 75 years old. Patients over 75 years old with NICM did not have lower mortality with primary prevention CRTD implantation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gras et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Systolic chronic heart failure with wide QRS (n=45,697). Cardiac resynchronization therapy without defibrillator (CRTP) vs. Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRTD) was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.63-1.76, p=<0.001). CRTP was associated with higher all-cause mortality compared to CRTD (11.6% vs 6.8% per patient-year; HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.63-1.76, P<0.001), except in patients >75 years with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: