4.6 Article

Applicability of a risk score for prediction of the long-term benefit of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy

Journal

EUROPACE
Volume 18, Issue 8, Pages 1187-1193

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/europace/euv352

Keywords

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Risk stratification; Risk score; All-cause mortality

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Goldenberg risk score, comprising five clinical risk factors (New York Heart Association class > 2, atrial fibrillation, QRS duration > 120 ms, age > 70 years, and urea > 26 mg/dL), may help identify patients in whom the survival benefit of the defibrillator may be limited. We aim at assessing whether this score can accurately predict the long-term all-cause mortality risk of patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and identify those who are more likely to benefit from the defibrillator. In this retrospective observational cohort study, 638 patients with ischaemic or non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy who had CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) (n = 224) vs. CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) (n = 414) implantation were prospectively followed up for survival outcomes. The long-term outcome of patients with CRT-D vs. CRT-P was compared within risk score categories and in patients with severe renal dysfunction. Mean follow-up in surviving and deceased patients was 62.7 and 32.5 months, respectively. This score showed higher discriminative performance in all-cause mortality prediction in CRT-D vs. CRT-P patients (area under the curve 0.718 +/- 0.041 vs. 0.650 +/- 0.032, respectively, P = 0.001). In those with scores 0-2, a CRT-D device decreased mortality rates in the first 4 years of follow-up compared with CRT-P (11.3 vs. 24.7%, P = 0.041), but this effect attenuated with longer follow-up duration (21.2 vs. 32.7%, P = 0.078). In this group, the benefit of CRT-D during the follow-up was seen after adjusting for traditional mortality predictors (hazard ratio 0.339, P = 0.001). No significant differences in mortality rates were seen in patients with score a parts per thousand yen3 (57.9% with CRT-D vs. 56.9%, P = 0.8) and those with severe renal dysfunction (92.9% in CRT-D vs. 76.2%, P = 0.17). Similar results were seen following propensity score matching. A simple risk stratification score comprising five clinical risk factors may help identify CRT patients who are more likely to benefit from the presence of the defibrillator.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available