Key result
Lower range improvement in LVEF (36%-40%) versus >40% was associated with an increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (HR 1.97; 95% CI 1.21-3.20; p=0.006) in patients post-CRT-D.
Why the study?
Patients undergoing CRT-D often experience LVEF improvement, but predictors of ventricular tachyarrhythmias among those whose LVEF improves beyond guideline recommendations for a defibrillator remain to be identified.
What are the predictors of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with CRT-D devices who experience LVEF improvement to >35%?
Cohort (n=651)
Yes
What are the predictors of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with CRT-D devices who experience LVEF improvement to >35%?
Hazard Ratio: 1.97 (95% CI 1.21–3.2)
p-value: p=0.006
Patients with CRT-D who improve LVEF to >35% remain at high risk for ventricular tachyarrhythmias if they have LVEF 36-40%, non-LBBB, or prior VTA, suggesting a need for continued monitoring despite LVEF recovery.
BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) often experience improvements in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This study aimed to identify predictors of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTA) in patients with CRT-D devices and LVEF improvement beyond guideline recommendations for a defibrillator. METHODS: Patients randomized to the CRT-D arm of the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy trial who improved their LVEF to > 35% at 12 months following CRT-D implant were included in this analysis (N = 651). Predictors of an appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) Rx VTA were evaluated by Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. RESULTS: We identified three predictors of VTA among patients treated with CRT-D subsequent to LVEF improvement > 35%: Lower range improvement in LVEF 36%-40% versus improvement to > 40% (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.21-3.20; p = 0.006); Baseline non-LBBB ECG morphology (hazard ratio [HR], 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-3.04; p = 0.004); Occurrence of VTA during the first year post-CRT-D (HR, 4.91; 95% CI, 2.99-8.07; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We identified a sub-group of patients with risk factors who remain at high risk of VTA despite improvement in LVEF following CRT implant. These patients require close monitoring despite improvement in LVEF beyond guideline recommendations for an ICD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Visca et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction post-CRT-D (n=651). Lower range improvement in LVEF (36%-40%) vs. Improvement in LVEF to > 40% was evaluated on Appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) Rx ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTA) (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.21-3.20, p=0.006). Lower range improvement in LVEF (36%-40%) versus >40% was associated with an increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (HR 1.97; 95% CI 1.21-3.20; p=0.006) in patients post-CRT-D.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: