Key result
CRT-D linked to ~160% higher 1-year loss of capture risk vs pacemaker.
Why the study?
The decision to implant CRT-D versus CRT-P requires understanding differences in lead complications, infections, and clinical outcomes within 1 year after implantation.
Cohort (n=402)
Absolute Event Rate: 9.2% vs 3.5%
p-value: p=0.01
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Higher capture loss with CRT-D than CRT-P may influence device selection; leaves open whether differences affect long-term outcomes.
Schuchert et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Heart failure requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=402). Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) vs. Cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P) was evaluated on Incidence of loss of capture at any lead (p=0.01). Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator was associated with a higher 1-year incidence of loss of capture compared to pacemaker (9.2% vs 3.5%, P=0.01), while clinical outcomes were similar.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: