Does Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improve clinical and structural outcomes in patients with LVEF >35% comparably to those with LVEF <35%?
Patients with LVEF >35%, NYHA Class III-IV, and QRS >130 ms may derive comparable clinical and structural benefit from CRT as those with LVEF <35%.
AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is currently limited to those with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% might benefit from CRT, we performed a retrospective analysis of the predictors of response to CRT (PROSPECT) database. METHODS AND RESULTS: PROSPECT was a prospective, multicentre study that enrolled CRT patients based on enrolling centre-evaluated LVEF 35% (OVER35) were compared with those whose LVEF was 35%. At entry, OVER35 had smaller LV volumes, shorter QRS duration, shorter 6-min walk distance, and were more likely to have ischaemic aetiology than UNDER35. Outcomes were comparable between the groups, with 62.8% of OVER35 improved in CCS (70.2% in UNDER35) and 50.8% of OVER35 improved in LVESV (57.8% in UNDER35). CONCLUSION: Patients with LVEF >35%, New York heart association functional Class III-IV status, and QRS >130 ms appear to derive clinical and structural benefit from CRT. As CRT may offer a valuable option for these patients, this hypothesis should be formally tested in a prospective, randomized multicentre trial.
Chung et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: