Key result
Digitalis therapy did not alter the risk of all-cause mortality in CRT recipients (adjusted HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.75-1.45; p=0.82), but negatively affected CRT response and increased ICD shocks.
Why the study?
Digitalis use in patients with severe heart failure receiving CRT is controversial and its effects on mortality and CRT response are unclear.
Does digitalis therapy reduce all-cause mortality in patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator?
Cohort (n=552)
Yes
Does digitalis therapy reduce all-cause mortality in patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator?
In CRT-defibrillator recipients, digitalis therapy does not impact mortality but is associated with reduced CRT response and an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmias requiring ICD shocks.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Digitalis shows neutral mortality in CRT recipients; leaves open effects on CRT response and arrhythmias for prospective trials.
Introduction: Digitalis use in patients with severe heart failure is controversial. We assessed the effects of digitalis therapy on mortality in a large, observational study in recipients of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Methods: Consecutive patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator in three European tertiary referral centers were enrolled and followed for a median of 28 months. Digitalis use was assessed at the time of CRT implantation. Multivariate Cox-regression model and propensity score matching was used to determine all-cause mortality as primary endpoint. CRT-response (defined as improvement of ≥1 NYHA class), echocardiographic improvement (defined as improvement of LVEF of ≥ 5%), and ICD shocks were assessed as secondary endpoints. Results: The study comprised 552 CRT recipients with standard indications, including 219 patients (40%) treated with digitalis. Compared to patients without digitalis, they had more often atrial fibrillation, poorer LVEF and higher NYHA class (all p ≤ 0.002). Crude analysis of all-cause mortality demonstrated a similar relative risk of death for patients with and without digitalis (HR=1.14; 95% CI 0.88-1.5; p=0.40). After adjustment for independent predictors of mortality, digitalis therapy did not alter the risk for death (adjusted HR=1.04; 95% CI 0.75-1.45; p=0.82). Also, in comparison to 286 propensity score matched patients, mortality was not affected by digitalis intake (propensity adjusted HR=1.11; 95% CI 0.72-1.70; p=0.64). CRT response was predominant in digitalis non-users concerning both improvement of HF symptoms and LVEF (NYHA p<0.01; LVEF p<0.01) while patients on digitalis had more often ventricular tachyarrhythmias requiring ICD shock (p=0.01). Conclusions: Digitalis therapy had no effect on mortality but did negatively affect CRT response and susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias requiring ICD shock treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erath et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Severe heart failure (n=552). Digitalis therapy vs. No digitalis therapy was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75-1.45, p=0.82). Digitalis therapy did not alter the risk of all-cause mortality in CRT recipients (adjusted HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.75-1.45; p=0.82), but negatively affected CRT response and increased ICD shocks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: