Quataert Ines, Blondeel Maarten, Trenson Sander, Ingelaere Sebastian, Haemers Peter, Robyns Tomas, Ector Joris, Voigt Jens-Uwe, Willems Rik, Garweg Christophe, Vandenberk Bert, Voros Gabor
Department of Cardiology, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Eur J Heart Fail. 2025 Jul;27(7):1262-1269. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.3728. Epub 2025 Jun 18.
While studies have shown worse clinical outcomes in patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) who underwent an upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) when compared to de novo CRT implantations, little is known about the clinical trajectory of these patients prior to upgrading to CRT.
This single-centre retrospective study included patients with ischaemic or non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy with a QRS duration <130 ms who underwent ICD implantation between 2010 and 2022. By reviewing the evolution of QRS duration, QRS morphology, and right ventricular pacing (RVP) percentages, it was assessed whether the patients developed an indication for CRT according to contemporary European Society of Cardiology guidelines during the follow-up. A total of 517 patients were included: median age at implant 63.8 years (range 55.5-70.2 years), 17.8% female, 29.4% secondary prevention, 65.2% ischaemic cardiomyopathy, and 53.8% single-chamber or subcutaneous ICD implants. Over a median follow-up of 6.6 years, 132 (25.5%) patients developed an indication for CRT corresponding to an incidence of 4.52% per year, of which only 46 (34.8%) actually underwent an upgrade to CRT. Independent predictors of developing an indication for CRT were baseline QRS duration (hazard ratio [HR] 1.06/ms; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.07) and age at implant (HR 1.04/year; 95% CI 1.02-1.06). An upgrade to CRT was associated with lower all-cause mortality, heart transplant, or assist device implant (log-rank p = 0.002) compared to patients who developed a CRT indication without upgrade to CRT.
One-quarter of patients implanted with an ICD who had a narrow QRS duration at the time of implantation developed an indication for CRT during a median follow-up of 6.6 years. Yet, the majority of these patients did not undergo an upgrade to CRT, underscoring potential gaps in CRT utilization.
虽然研究表明,与初次植入心脏再同步治疗(CRT)相比,接受CRT升级的植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)患者的临床结局更差,但对于这些患者在升级至CRT之前的临床病程知之甚少。
这项单中心回顾性研究纳入了2010年至2022年间接受ICD植入的缺血性或非缺血性心肌病患者,其QRS波时限<130毫秒。通过回顾QRS波时限、QRS形态和右心室起搏(RVP)百分比的演变,评估患者在随访期间是否根据当代欧洲心脏病学会指南出现CRT指征。共纳入517例患者:植入时的中位年龄为63.8岁(范围55.5 - 70.2岁),女性占17.8%,二级预防占29.4%,缺血性心肌病占65.2%,单腔或皮下ICD植入占53.8%。在中位随访6.6年期间,132例(25.5%)患者出现CRT指征,每年发生率为4.52%,其中只有46例(34.8%)实际接受了CRT升级。出现CRT指征的独立预测因素为基线QRS波时限(风险比[HR] 1.06/毫秒;95%置信区间[CI] 1.04 - 1.07)和植入时年龄(HR 1.04/岁;95% CI 1.02 - 1.06)。与出现CRT指征但未升级至CRT的患者相比,升级至CRT与全因死亡率、心脏移植或辅助装置植入率较低相关(对数秩p = 0.002)。
在植入ICD时QRS波时限狭窄的患者中,四分之一在中位随访6.6年期间出现CRT指征。然而,这些患者中的大多数并未接受CRT升级,这凸显了CRT应用方面的潜在差距。