Harmonizing Heartbeats: The Mosaic of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Responders—A Comprehensive Exploration of Diverse Criteria and Predictors
-
Published:2024-08-21
Issue:16
Volume:13
Page:4938
-
ISSN:2077-0383
-
Container-title:Journal of Clinical Medicine
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:JCM
Author:
Boxhammer Elke1ORCID, Zauner Sophie1, Kraus Johannes1, Dinges Christian2ORCID, Schernthaner Christiana1ORCID, Danmayr Franz1, Kolbitsch Tobias1ORCID, Granitz Christina1, Motloch Lukas J.3, Hammerer Matthias1, Lichtenauer Michael1, Hoppe Uta C.1, Strohmer Bernhard1
Affiliation:
1. Department of Internal Medicine II, Division of Cardiology, Paracelsus Medical University Hospital of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria 2. Department of Cardiovascular and Endovascular Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Hospital of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Nephrology and Intensive Care Medicine, Salzkammergut Clinic Vöcklabruck, 4840 Vöcklabruck, Austria
Abstract
Background: Heart failure (HF) remains a challenging healthcare issue necessitating innovative therapies like cardiac resynchronization–defibrillation therapy (CRT-D). However, the definition of a CRT-D response lacks uniformity, impeding effective clinical evaluation. This study explores diverse CRT-D responder definitions encompassing functional, echocardiographic and laboratory criteria. Materials & Methods: A single-center study involving 132 CRT-D patients scrutinized responder criteria including NYHA stage, LVEF increase and proBNP decrease. Statistical analyses such as Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox hazard regression were employed to evaluate responder characteristics and survival outcomes. Results: Responder rates varied across criteria, revealing nuanced patient profiles. CRT-D responders defined by NYHA decrease, LVEF increase or proBNP decrease exhibit improved survival rates after 2 and 3 years (p < 0.050). Young age, absence of recent myocardial infarction and normal right ventricular echocardiographic parameters emerge as predictors for positive response. In part, drug-based HF therapy correlates with increased responder rates. Cox regression identified LVEF ≥ 5% and proBNP decrease ≥ 25% as independent predictors of extended survival. Conclusions: CRT-D responder definitions exhibit considerable variability, emphasizing the need for a nuanced patient-centered approach. Factors like right ventricular function, drug therapy, atrial fibrillation and renal function influence responses. This study enriches our understanding of CRT-D response and contributes to the foundation for personalized HF management.
Reference38 articles.
1. Epidemiology of Heart Failure: A Contemporary Perspective;Roger;Circ. Res.,2021 2. Cardiac resynchronization therapy: History, present status, and future directions;Jaffe;Ochsner J.,2014 3. Nakai, T., Ikeya, Y., Kogawa, R., Otsuka, N., Wakamatsu, Y., Kurokawa, S., Ohkubo, K., Nagashima, K., and Okumura, Y. (2021). What Are the Expectations for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy? A Validation of Two Response Definitions. J. Clin. Med., 10. 4. Bakos, Z., Chatterjee, N.C., Reitan, C., Singh, J.P., and Borgquist, R. (2018). Prediction of clinical outcome in patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy—The role of NT-ProBNP and a combined response score. BMC Cardiovasc. Disord., 18. 5. Echo response and clinical outcome in CRT-D patients;Mast;Neth. Heart J. Mon. J. Neth. Soc. Cardiol. Neth. Heart Found.,2016
|
|