Compared with optimal pharmacological therapy, CRT-P and CRT-D reduced all-cause hospital admissions by 21% and 25%, cardiac by 34% and 37%, and heart failure admissions by 44% and 41%.
RCT (n=1,520)
1:2:2 ratio
1,520 patients with advanced heart failure.
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-P) or CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) vs Optimal pharmacological therapy
All-cause, cardiac, and heart failure hospital admissions per patient-year of follow-up — 21% and 25% reduction in all-cause hospital admissions
Effect estimate: 21% and 25% reduction in all-cause hospital admissions
BACKGROUND: In the Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing and Defibrillation in Heart Failure (COMPANION) trial, 1520 patients with advanced heart failure were assigned in a 1:2:2 ratio to optimal pharmacological therapy or optimal pharmacological therapy plus cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-P) or CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D). Use of CRT-P and CRT-D was associated with a significant reduction in combined risk of death or all-cause hospitalizations. Because mortality also was significantly reduced (optimal pharmacological therapy versus CRT-D only), an assessment of the true reduction in hospitalization rates must consider the competing risk of death and varying follow-up times. METHODS AND RESULTS: To overcome the challenges of comparing treatment groups, we used a nonparametric test of right-censored recurrent events that accounts for multiple hospital admissions, differential follow-up time between treatment groups, and death as a competing risk. An end-point committee adjudicated and classified all hospitalizations. Compared with optimal pharmacological therapy, CRT-P and CRT-D were associated with a 21% and 25% reduction in all-cause, 34% and 37% reduction in cardiac, and 44% and 41% reduction in heart failure hospital admissions per patient-year of follow-up, respectively. Similar reductions were seen in hospitalization days per patient-year. The reduction in hospitalization rate for heart failure in the CRT groups appeared within days of randomization and remained sustained. Noncardiac hospitalization rates were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Use of CRT with or without a defibrillator in advanced heart failure patients was associated with marked reductions in all-cause, cardiac, and heart failure hospitalization rates in an analysis that accounted for the competing risk of mortality and unequal follow-up time.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Inder S. Anand
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Peter E. Carson
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Elizabeth Galle
CVRx (United States)
Circulation
Veterans Health Administration
Boston Scientific (Netherlands)
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Anand et al. (Tue,) conducted a rct in advanced heart failure (n=1,520). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-P) or CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) vs. Optimal pharmacological therapy was evaluated on All-cause, cardiac, and heart failure hospital admissions per patient-year of follow-up (21% and 25% reduction in all-cause hospital admissions). Compared with optimal pharmacological therapy, CRT-P and CRT-D reduced all-cause hospital admissions by 21% and 25%, cardiac by 34% and 37%, and heart failure admissions by 44% and 41%.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a20ab864a00abbd10d11124 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.108.793273