• Valentina Kutyifa, Martin Stockburger, James P Daubert, Fredrik Holmqvist, Brian Olshansky, Claudio Schuger, Helmut Klein, Ilan Goldenberg, Andrew Brenyo, Scott McNitt, Bela Merkely, Wojciech Zareba, and Arthur J Moss.
• From the University of Rochester Medical Center, NY (V.K., H.K., I.G., A.B., S.M., W.Z., A.J.M.); Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a Joint Cooperation between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany (M.S.); Cardiology Department, Duke University, Durham, NC (J.P.D., F.H.); Department of Medicine, University of Iowa Health Care (B.O.); Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI (C.S.); and Semmelweis University, Heart Center, Budapest, Hungary (B.M.). Valentina.Kutyifa@heart.rochester.edu.
• Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014 Aug 1; 7 (4): 645-51.

BackgroundIn Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT), patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch block, intraventricular conduction delay) did not have clinical benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D). We hypothesized that baseline PR interval modulates clinical response to CRT-D therapy in patients with non-LBBB.Methods And ResultsNon-LBBB patients (n=537; 30%) were divided into 2 groups based on their baseline PR interval as normal (including minimally prolonged) PR (PR <230 ms) and prolonged PR (PR ≥230 ms). The primary end point was heart failure or death. Separate secondary end points included heart failure events and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare risk of end point events by CRT-D to implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in the PR subgroups. There were 96 patients (22%) with a prolonged PR and 438 patients (78%) with a normal PR interval. In non-LBBB patients with a prolonged PR interval, CRT-D treatment was associated with a 73% reduction in the risk of heart failure/death (hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.57; P<0.001) and 81% decrease in the risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.57; P<0.001) compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. In non-LBBB patients with normal PR, CRT-D therapy was associated with a trend toward an increased risk of heart failure/death (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.19; P=0.078; interaction P<0.001) and a more than 2-fold higher mortality (hazard ratio, 2.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-4.09; P=0.022; interaction P<0.001) compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy.ConclusionsThe data support the use of CRT-D in MADIT-CRT non-LBBB patients with a prolonged PR interval. In non-LBBB patients with a normal PR interval, implantation of a CRT-D may be deleterious.Clinical Trial Registrationhttp://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00180271.© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.

41 keywords...

hide…