Key result
Recent meta-analyses suggest that patients with symptomatic heart failure and QRS durations between 120 and 150 ms do not benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Why the study?
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit patients with symptomatic heart failure and QRS durations between 120 and 150 ms?
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit patients with symptomatic heart failure and QRS durations between 120 and 150 ms?
Recent meta-analyses challenge current guidelines by showing that CRT does not benefit heart failure patients with QRS durations between 120 and 150 ms.
Should not yet alter CRT eligibility; leaves open need for dedicated RCTs in this QRS range.
Scope of the ProblemCurrent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society as well as European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend the use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and QRS durations >120 ms 1,2 (Table 1).However, 2 recent meta-analyses by Sipahi et al 6 and Stavrakis et al 7 challenged these recommendations.Both studies found that patients with QRS durations between 120 and 150 ms do not benefit from CRT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guglin et al. (2013) conducted a review in Symptomatic heart failure. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was evaluated. Recent meta-analyses suggest that patients with symptomatic heart failure and QRS durations between 120 and 150 ms do not benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: