Key result
In patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy, the presence of atrial fibrillation did not significantly affect 2-year mortality compared to those without AF (25.8% vs 16.9%, P=0.2).
Why the study?
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy provide similar mortality benefits in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to those without atrial fibrillation?
Population
175 patients who underwent CRT implantation, including 66 patients with documented atrial fibrillation.
Comparison
Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients… vs Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
2 years
Authors
Loading...
Should not yet change CRT eligibility based on AF; extends observational data but leaves randomized confirmation open.
Cohort (n=175)
No
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy provide similar mortality benefits in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to those without atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 25.8% vs 16.9%
p-value: p=0.2
Cardiac resynchronization therapy appears to offer similar 1- and 2-year survival benefits in heart failure patients regardless of the presence of atrial fibrillation.
Eisen et al. (2013) conducted a cohort in Heart failure requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=175). Atrial fibrillation vs. No atrial fibrillation was evaluated on 2-year mortality (p=0.2). In patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy, the presence of atrial fibrillation did not significantly affect 2-year mortality compared to those without AF (25.8% vs 16.9%, P=0.2).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: