4.5 Article

Very long term follow-up of cardiac resynchronization therapy: Clinical outcome and predictors of mortality

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
Volume 10, Issue 8, Pages 796-801

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2008.06.013

Keywords

heart failure; cardiac resynchronization therapy; mortality; predictors

Funding

  1. Danish Heart Foundation [07-4-B695-A1464-22378]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and survival in patients with heart failure and wide QRS, however, long term clinical outcome is unknown. Aims: To identify predictors of mortality and evaluate the effects of CRT after long term follow-up. Methods: Consecutive patients treated with CRT between 1997 and 2002 were included. We collected clinical information from patient files. Patients who were still alive underwent echocardiography and clinical evaluation. Results: We included 179 patients (median age 65.5 years, 144 male). Median follow-up for survival was 4.0 years. Mortality at one and five years was 15% and 53%, respectively. Predictors of mortality were, ischaemic heart disease (IHD), higher NYHA class and lower LVEF (< 22.59%) at baseline, and no improvement in NYHA class at early follow-up. NYHA class remained stable from early to long term follow-up after a median of 5.1 years. In patients with non-IHD median LVEF increased significantly from early to long term follow-up (39% vs. 50% p=0.007). Conclusion: Predictors of mortality in patients with CRT are IHD, lower LVEF and higher NYHA class at baseline, and no symptomatic response to CRT, After 5 years follow-up, clinical effects are sustained, and in patients with non-IHD further improvements in LVEF are observed. (C) 2008 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available