Cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation.
Atrial fibrillation
Cardiac resynchronization therapy
Defibrillation shock
Heart failure
Heart rate
Journal
ESC heart failure
ISSN: 2055-5822
Titre abrégé: ESC Heart Fail
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101669191
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2021
12 2021
Historique:
revised:
22
07
2021
received:
23
06
2021
accepted:
19
08
2021
pubmed:
14
9
2021
medline:
22
3
2022
entrez:
13
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There are conflicting data on the benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure (HF) patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to compare patient outcomes according to the presence or absence of permanent AF at device implantation. We retrospectively analysed remote monitoring data from 1141 CRT defibrillators. Propensity score with inverse-probability weighting method was used to balance AF and sinus rhythm (SR) groups. Analysis endpoints included total mortality, appropriate defibrillation shocks, and CRT percentage. There were 229 patients (20.1%) in the AF group and 912 patients (79.9%) in the SR group. Compared with SR patients, AF patients were older (median age, 77 vs. 72 years, P < 0.001), more frequently male (82.5% vs. 75.5%, P = 0.02), and had higher heart rate (75.7 vs. 71.0 b.p.m., P < 0.001). Of the 229 AF patients, 162 (70.7%) received suboptimal CRT (<98%) and 67 (29.3%) had adequate CRT (≥98%). During a median follow-up of 24 months, total mortality did not differ between AF and SR groups (propensity-score-weighted hazard ratio, HR 1.32 [95% confidence interval, 0.82-2.15], P = 0.25). The risk of appropriate shocks was significantly higher in the AF group with <98% CRT than in the SR group (weighted-HR, 1.99 [1.21-3.26], P = 0.006) and was similar in the AF group with ≥98% CRT versus the SR group (1.29 [0.66-2.53], P = 0.45). During follow-up, sinus rhythm was recovered in 23 patients in the AF group (10%) after a median time of 106 (42-256) days. The rate of sinus rhythm recovery in the AF group was 4.5 (95% CI, 2.8-6.7) per 100 patient-years; the rate of permanent AF occurrence in the SR group was 2.5 (95% CI, 1.9-3.3) per 100 patient-years. Although mortality was similar across patient groups, patients with permanent AF and suboptimal CRT had twofold higher risk of appropriate shocks than SR patients or AF patients with CRT ≥ 98%.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34514741
doi: 10.1002/ehf2.13599
pmc: PMC8712818
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5204-5212Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.
Références
Clin Cardiol. 2019 Jan;42(1):76-83
pubmed: 30421438
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Feb 7;69(5):556-569
pubmed: 28153111
JACC Heart Fail. 2013 Dec;1(6):500-7
pubmed: 24622002
Eur Heart J. 2016 Jul 14;37(27):2129-2200
pubmed: 27206819
Eur J Heart Fail. 2011 Aug;13(8):868-76
pubmed: 21558331
Heart Rhythm. 2011 Sep;8(9):1469-75
pubmed: 21699828
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020 Jul;31(7):1784-1792
pubmed: 32412126
Eur Heart J. 2005 Jul;26(13):1303-8
pubmed: 15767288
Circulation. 2006 Jul 4;114(1):18-25
pubmed: 16801461
Eur J Heart Fail. 2018 Jun;20(6):1039-1051
pubmed: 29457358
Am J Cardiol. 2003 Mar 20;91(6A):2D-8D
pubmed: 12670636
Multivariate Behav Res. 2011 May;46(3):399-424
pubmed: 21818162
ESC Heart Fail. 2021 Dec;8(6):5204-5212
pubmed: 34514741
Eur Heart J. 2002 Nov;23(22):1780-7
pubmed: 12419298
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020 Sep;31(9):2393-2402
pubmed: 32652754
Circ Heart Fail. 2012 Sep 1;5(5):566-70
pubmed: 22896584
Eur Heart J. 2010 Apr;31(8):976-83
pubmed: 20071325
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014 Jun;7(3):370-6
pubmed: 24838004
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Jun;14(6):858-865
pubmed: 28323173
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020 Apr;31(4):846-853
pubmed: 32064713
N Engl J Med. 2005 Apr 14;352(15):1539-49
pubmed: 15753115
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Apr;14(4):541-547
pubmed: 28104482
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2012 Dec;35(3):331-6; discussion 336
pubmed: 22890483