Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure

Abstract Background Evidence regarding the incremental benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a defibrillator (CRT‐D) versus without (CRT‐P) in elderly patients with heart failure is limited. We compared mortality and cardiac hospitalisation between CRT‐D and CRT‐P in the elderly. M...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Simon Christie, Brett Hiebert, Colette M. Seifer, Clarence Khoo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2019-02-01
Series:Journal of Arrhythmia
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12131
_version_ 1819124093058809856
author Simon Christie
Brett Hiebert
Colette M. Seifer
Clarence Khoo
author_facet Simon Christie
Brett Hiebert
Colette M. Seifer
Clarence Khoo
author_sort Simon Christie
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Evidence regarding the incremental benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a defibrillator (CRT‐D) versus without (CRT‐P) in elderly patients with heart failure is limited. We compared mortality and cardiac hospitalisation between CRT‐D and CRT‐P in the elderly. Methods A retrospective chart review identified all consecutive patients with age ≥75 with CRT implantation over the last 10 years at a Canadian tertiary care cardiac centre. Kaplan‐Meier survival analyses and cumulative incidence curves were used to compare mortality and time to first cardiac hospitalisation, respectively, with CRT‐D versus CRT‐P over a 3 year period. Analyses were also repeated with propensity score matching based on age, sex, primary versus secondary prevention, date of implant, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Results One hundred and seventy CRT patients were identified. A total of 128 received CRT‐D while 42 received CRT‐P. Median age was 79 (IQR 77‐81), and the majority were male (83%). CRT‐P patients had a higher burden of comorbidities (Charlson score 7, IQR 6‐8) than CRT‐D patients (Charlson score 5, IQR 5‐7; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups in an unmatched comparison (P = 0.69) and with a propensity score‐matched cohort (P = 0.91). Secondary prevention CRT‐D patients had a higher risk of hospitalisation compared to primary prevention CRT‐D patients; however, there was no significant difference in hospitalisation between the CRT‐D and CRT‐P groups. Conclusion This study suggests there is no significant difference in mortality or cardiac hospitalisation between CRT‐D and CRT‐P in elderly patients with heart failure.
first_indexed 2024-12-22T07:18:45Z
format Article
id doaj.art-24df9fe86e484a6c8b1fe40c3da6fc39
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1880-4276
1883-2148
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T07:18:45Z
publishDate 2019-02-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Arrhythmia
spelling doaj.art-24df9fe86e484a6c8b1fe40c3da6fc392022-12-21T18:34:20ZengWileyJournal of Arrhythmia1880-42761883-21482019-02-01351616910.1002/joa3.12131Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failureSimon Christie0Brett Hiebert1Colette M. Seifer2Clarence Khoo3Max Rady College of Medicine University of Manitoba Winnipeg Manitoba CanadaCardiac Sciences Program Winnipeg Regional Health Authority Winnipeg Manitoba CanadaSection of Cardiology University of Manitoba Winnipeg Manitoba CanadaSection of Cardiology University of Manitoba Winnipeg Manitoba CanadaAbstract Background Evidence regarding the incremental benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with a defibrillator (CRT‐D) versus without (CRT‐P) in elderly patients with heart failure is limited. We compared mortality and cardiac hospitalisation between CRT‐D and CRT‐P in the elderly. Methods A retrospective chart review identified all consecutive patients with age ≥75 with CRT implantation over the last 10 years at a Canadian tertiary care cardiac centre. Kaplan‐Meier survival analyses and cumulative incidence curves were used to compare mortality and time to first cardiac hospitalisation, respectively, with CRT‐D versus CRT‐P over a 3 year period. Analyses were also repeated with propensity score matching based on age, sex, primary versus secondary prevention, date of implant, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Results One hundred and seventy CRT patients were identified. A total of 128 received CRT‐D while 42 received CRT‐P. Median age was 79 (IQR 77‐81), and the majority were male (83%). CRT‐P patients had a higher burden of comorbidities (Charlson score 7, IQR 6‐8) than CRT‐D patients (Charlson score 5, IQR 5‐7; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups in an unmatched comparison (P = 0.69) and with a propensity score‐matched cohort (P = 0.91). Secondary prevention CRT‐D patients had a higher risk of hospitalisation compared to primary prevention CRT‐D patients; however, there was no significant difference in hospitalisation between the CRT‐D and CRT‐P groups. Conclusion This study suggests there is no significant difference in mortality or cardiac hospitalisation between CRT‐D and CRT‐P in elderly patients with heart failure.https://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12131cardiac resynchronization therapydefibrillatordeviceelderlyheart failure
spellingShingle Simon Christie
Brett Hiebert
Colette M. Seifer
Clarence Khoo
Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
Journal of Arrhythmia
cardiac resynchronization therapy
defibrillator
device
elderly
heart failure
title Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
title_full Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
title_fullStr Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
title_full_unstemmed Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
title_short Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
title_sort clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without a defibrillator in elderly patients with heart failure
topic cardiac resynchronization therapy
defibrillator
device
elderly
heart failure
url https://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12131
work_keys_str_mv AT simonchristie clinicaloutcomesofcardiacresynchronizationtherapywithandwithoutadefibrillatorinelderlypatientswithheartfailure
AT bretthiebert clinicaloutcomesofcardiacresynchronizationtherapywithandwithoutadefibrillatorinelderlypatientswithheartfailure
AT colettemseifer clinicaloutcomesofcardiacresynchronizationtherapywithandwithoutadefibrillatorinelderlypatientswithheartfailure
AT clarencekhoo clinicaloutcomesofcardiacresynchronizationtherapywithandwithoutadefibrillatorinelderlypatientswithheartfailure