Key result
CRT-D cuts all-cause mortality ~31% compared to CRT-P.
Why the study?
Many patients with impaired left ventricular function and abnormal ventricular conduction may be eligible for both CRT and ICD, but it is unclear if combined treatment provides additional benefit over one treatment alone.
Meta-Analysis (n=12,378)
Relative Risk: 0.69 (95% CI 0.62–0.76)
Absolute Event Rate: 16.6% vs 27.1%
Number Needed to Treat: 10
p-value: p=<0.00001
CRT-D was associated with lower mortality than CRT-P; leaves open net benefit after device morbidity in real-world HF.
Current evidence-based guidelines recommend an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in selected patients with impaired left ventricular function, and cardiac resynchronization therapy for improvement of symptoms and survival in selected patients with impaired left ventricular function and abnormal ventricular conduction. Many patients may be eligible for both treatments, but it does not necessarily follow that such patients would obtain additional benefit from the combined treatment over one treatment alone. A simple pragmatic approach would be to use resynchronisation therapy, in order to reduce symptoms and extend life in patients with New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, with the addition of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator left to clinical judgment on an individual basis when additional indications exist. When such an addition is contemplated the hypothesized incremental benefits in survival would need to be balanced by the possible increase in morbidity owing to, for example, inappropriate shocks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stabile et al. (2009) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=12,378). Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) vs. Cardiac resynchronization therapy with pacemaker (CRT-P) was evaluated on Total all-cause mortality (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62-0.76, p=<0.00001). Cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) reduced all-cause mortality by 31% compared to CRT-P (RR 0.69), with a number needed to treat of 10.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: