Key result
In heart failure patients with class IA indications, CRT-D improved long-term survival compared to CRT-P, which was an independent predictor of all-cause death (HR 1.97; 95% CI 1.21-3.16; P=0.007).
Why the study?
Does CRT-D improve survival compared to CRT-P in heart failure patients with class IA ESC indications for CRT?
Population
374 heart failure patients with class IA ESC indications for CRT
Comparison
Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator vs Cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
median 55 months
Authors
Loading...
May inform CRT-D selection in class IA HF; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Cohort (n=374)
Yes
Does CRT-D improve survival compared to CRT-P in heart failure patients with class IA ESC indications for CRT?
Hazard Ratio: 1.97 (95% CI 1.21–3.16)
Absolute Event Rate: 6.6% vs 10.4%
p-value: p=0.007
CRT-D is associated with greater long-term survival compared to CRT-P in heart failure patients with class IA indications for CRT.
Morani et al. (2013) conducted a cohort in heart failure (n=374). Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) vs. Cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P) was evaluated on death from any cause (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.21-3.16, p=0.007). In heart failure patients with class IA indications, CRT-D improved long-term survival compared to CRT-P, which was an independent predictor of all-cause death (HR 1.97; 95% CI 1.21-3.16; P=0.007).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: