Why the study?
Does ambulatory respiratory rate monitoring identify patients at higher risk of worsening heart failure in ICD and CRT-D recipients?
Does ambulatory respiratory rate monitoring identify patients at higher risk of worsening heart failure in ICD and CRT-D recipients?
Ambulatory daily respiratory rate trends monitored via implantable devices can identify heart failure patients at significantly increased near-term risk of hospitalization.
Device-based respiratory variability signals near-term HF risk in ICD/CRT-D patients; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
PURPOSE: Respiratory distress is the primary driver for heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Implantable pacemakers and defibrillators are capable of monitoring respiratory rate (RR) in ambulatory HF patients. We investigated changes in RR prior to HF hospitalizations and its near-term risk stratification power. METHODS: NOTICE-HF was an international multi-center study. Patients were implanted with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator, capable of trending daily maximum, median, and minimum RR (maxRR, medRR, minRR). RR from 120 patients with 9 months of follow-up was analyzed. One-tailed Student's t test was used to compare RR values prior to HF events to baseline defined as 4 weeks prior to the events. A Cox regression model was used to calculate the hazard ratios (HR) for the 30-day HF hospitalization risk based on RR values in the preceding month. RESULTS: Daily maxRR, medRR, and minRR were significantly elevated prior to HF events compared to baseline (ΔmaxRR 1.8 ± 3.0; p = 0.02; ΔmedRR, 2.1 ± 2.8; p = 0.007; ΔminRR, 1.5 ± 2.1, p = 0.008). Risk of experiencing HF events within 30-days was increased if the standard deviation of medRR over the preceding month was above 1.0 br/min (HR = 12.3, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.57-59, p = 0.002). The risk remained high after adjusting for clinical variables that differed at enrollment. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory daily respiratory rate trends may be a valuable addition to standard management for HF patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goetze et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: