Key result
Negative echocardiographic response to CRT-D linked to ~341% higher mortality versus super-responders.
Why the study?
Does the degree of echocardiographic reverse remodeling after CRT-D predict long-term mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and appropriate ICD shocks?
Cohort (n=334)
Does the degree of echocardiographic reverse remodeling after CRT-D predict long-term mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and appropriate ICD shocks?
Echocardiographic reverse remodeling after CRT-D strongly predicts long-term clinical outcomes, with less favorable remodeling associated with significantly higher mortality, heart failure hospitalizations, and appropriate ICD shocks.
Negative CRT-D responders warrant closer surveillance; this Level 3 cohort finding leaves open whether targeting remodeling alters outcomes.
Background: Reverse remodeling after cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator backup (CRT-D) is heterogeneous and may reflect both pre-implant substrate and post-implant electrical response, with implications for subsequent outcomes. Objectives: This study evaluated a graded echocardiographic response framework after CRT-D as an integrative phenotype linking pre-implant substrate, peri-implant electrical features, and post-landmark clinical outcomes. Methods: The analytic cohort included 334 CRT-D recipients with complete four-group classification based on relative left ventricular end-systolic volume reduction at the first eligible post-implant echocardiogram. Baseline correlates of the 4-class response phenotype were assessed using ordinal logistic regression, supported by permutation-importance analysis. A stacked peri-implant model added ΔQRS, RV1SI pattern on ECG, left ventricular lead position, and lead depth. Time-to-event analyses used a landmark design anchored at the first post-CRT echocardiogram. Results: In the pre-implantation ordinal model, female sex (p = 0.005), higher baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (p = 0.032), left bundle branch block (p = 0.038), and dilated cardiomyopathy (p = 0.048) were associated with a more favorable response class. In the stacked peri-implant model, ΔQRS was the strongest correlate of higher response class (OR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.15–1.73; p = 0.0008). Mortality differed across response classes (log-rank p < 0.001); compared with super-responders, negative responders had higher adjusted mortality (HR: 4.41; 95% CI: 1.82–10.70). At 60 months, heart failure hospitalization ranged from 23.3% to 2.9% and first appropriate ICD shock from 29.3% to 9.0% from negative responders to super-responders. Conclusions: After CRT-D, reverse-remodeling phenotype identified clinically distinct post-landmark risk profiles. Less favorable remodeling was associated with worse mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and appropriate ICD shock.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheilas et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Heart failure (CRT-D recipients) (n=334). Negative echocardiographic response after CRT-D vs. Super-responders was evaluated on Mortality (HR 4.41, 95% CI 1.82-10.70, p=<0.001). Compared with super-responders, negative echocardiographic responders to CRT-D had significantly higher adjusted mortality (HR 4.41; 95% CI 1.82-10.70).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: