Search

There are limited data on the prognostic implications of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) assessment in patients with mildly symptomatic heart failure (HF) who receive cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D).The effect of elevated baseline and 1-year BNP levels (dichotomized at the upper tertile BNP of 120 pg/mL) on the risk of HF or death was assessed among the cohort of 1197 patients with baseline BNP data enrolled in MADIT (Multicenter Automated Defibrillator Implantation Trial)-CRT. Elevated baseline BNP was associated with a significant 68% (P=0.007) and 58% (P=0.02) increase in the risk of HF or death among MADIT-CRT patients allocated to CRT-D and implantable cardioverter defibrillator-only therapy, respectively. At 1 year of follow-up, patients allocated to CRT-D displayed significantly greater reductions in BNP (26% reduction) levels compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator-only patients (8% increase; P=0.005). Patients with CRT-D in whom 1-year BNP levels were reduced or remained low experienced a significantly lower risk of subsequent HF or death as compared with patients in whom 1-year BNP levels were high. Similarly, the echocardiographic response to CRT-D was highest among those who maintained low BNP levels or in whom BNP level at 1-year was reduced.Our findings suggest that assessment of baseline and follow-up BNP provides important prognostic implications in patients with mildly symptomatic HF who receive CRT.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00180271. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Right ventricular function (RVF) is an important determinant of outcome in patients with heart failure, and those with severe RV dysfunction have worse outcome after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We used data from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) Trial to determine whether therapy with CRT is influenced by or affects RV function and to define the relationship between RV function and outcomes.A total of 1820 patients were randomly assigned to CRT plus implantable cardioverter defibrillator or implantable cardioverter defibrillator-only in a 3:2 ratio. We assessed RVF as RV fractional area change by echocardiography at baseline and after 1 year of therapy (n=1511 and 1273, respectively). The median RV fractional area change was 41%, with 10.9% of patients <35% at baseline. Baseline RVF did not modify the treatment effect of CRT on the primary outcome (interaction P=0.19). Randomization to CRT-implantable cardioverter defibrillator was associated with a greater improvement in RVF (ΔRV fractional area change 8.1% versus 5.4%; P<0.001), and improvement in RVF was related to subsequent outcomes. Every 5-point increase in RV fractional area change was associated with a 22% reduction in event rates (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.92; P=0.003), although this was not independent of the concurrent improvement in left ventricular function. Baseline tricuspid regurgitant velocity, a measure of pulmonary systolic pressure, was predictive of events in a multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.8; P=0.003).In this population with mild heart failure symptoms, CRT was associated with improvement in RVF, which improved in parallel with improvement in left ventricular function. Patients with the best RVF at 1 year demonstrated the lowest subsequent event rates.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01294449. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is highly effective in reducing mortality due to cardiac arrhythmias in high-risk cardiac patients. However, inappropriate therapies caused predominantly by supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVTs) remain a significant side effect of ICD therapy despite medical treatment, affecting 8-40% of patients. The MADIT-RIT is a global, prospective, randomized, nonblinded, three-arm, multicenter clinical investigation to be performed in the Unites States, Europe, Canada, Israel and Japan, and will utilize approximately 90 centers with plan to enroll 1500 patients programmed to three treatment arms. The objective of the MADIT-RIT trial is to determine if dual-chamber ICD or CRT-D devices with high rate cutoff (MADIT-RIT-Arm B) and/or long delay in combination with detection enhancements (MADIT-RIT-Arm C) are associated with fewer patients experiencing inappropriate therapies than standard programming (MADIT-RIT-Arm A) during postimplant follow-up of patients with indication for primary prevention device therapy. This paper describes design and analytic plan for the MADIT-RIT trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The evaluation of the risk of recurring heart failure events (HFEs) was a pre-specified substudy of MADIT-CRT (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy). Background: There are limited data regarding the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) on the occurrence of recurring heart failure episodes after a first post-implantation HFE. Methods: Data with regard to recurring HFEs were prospectively collected for all 1,820 MADIT-CRT participants. The CRT-D versus defibrillator-only risk for nonfatal first- and subsequent-HFEs was assessed by Cox proportional hazards and Andersen-Gill proportional intensity regression modeling, respectively, in efficacy analyses recognizing active device-type during follow-up. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that CRT-D was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of a first HFE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44 to 0.67, p < 0.001) and with a similar magnitude of reduction in the risk of HFEs subsequent to a first post-enrollment event (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.85, p = 0.003). The benefit of CRT-D for the prevention of first and subsequent HFEs was pronounced among patients with left bundle branch block (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.49, p < 0.001; and HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.76, p = 0.001, respectively) and nonsignificant in non-left bundle branch block patients (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.64, p = 0.55; and HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.69, p = 0.96, respectively; p values for interaction: p < 0.001 and p = 0.06, respectively). The occurrences of first and second HFEs were associated with 7- and nearly 19-fold respective increases in the risk of subsequent mortality. Conclusions: In the MADIT-CRT trial, the benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy for the reduction in recurring HFEs was maintained after the occurrence of a first post-enrollment event. The occurrence of HFEs greatly increased the risk of death. (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy; NCT00180271) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article presents information study which investigated on the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and the type of heart failure patients who would benefit most. Both mechanical dyssynchrony and contractile function can reportedly help determine which patients may respond positively to and gain benefits from CRT. Generally, patients with mild to moderate case of dysynchrony or with best contractile function at baseline are the ones who would benefit from CRT.

Background: This trial was designed to determine whether cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing would reduce the risk of death or heart-failure events in patients with mild cardiac symptoms, a reduced ejection fraction, and a wide QRS complex. Methods: During a 4.5-year period, we enrolled and followed 1820 patients with ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an ejection fraction of 30% or less, a QRS duration of 130 msec or more, and New York Heart Association class I or II symptoms. Patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2 ratio to receive CRT plus an implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) (1089 patients) or an ICD alone (731 patients). The primary end point was death from any cause or a nonfatal heart-failure event (whichever came first). Heart-failure events were diagnosed by physicians who were aware of the treatment assignments, but they were adjudicated by a committee that was unaware of assignments. Results: During an average follow-up of 2.4 years, the primary end point occurred in 187 of 1089 patients in the CRT–ICD group (17.2%) and 185 of 731 patients in the ICD-only group (25.3%) (hazard ratio in the CRT–ICD group, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.84; P=0.001). The benefit did not differ significantly between patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and those with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. The superiority of CRT was driven by a 41% reduction in the risk of heart-failure events, a finding that was evident primarily in a prespecified subgroup of patients with a QRS duration of 150 msec or more. CRT was associated with a significant reduction in left ventricular volumes and improvement in the ejection fraction. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the overall risk of death, with a 3% annual mortality rate in each treatment group. Serious adverse events were infrequent in the two groups. Conclusions: CRT combined with ICD decreased the risk of heart-failure events in relatively asymptomatic patients with a low ejection fraction and wide QRS complex. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00180271.) N Engl J Med 2009;361:1329-38. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We sought to evaluate the cost implications of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), using utilization, cost, and survival data from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT)-II. Background: This trial showed that prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator reduces the rate of mortality in patients who experienced a previous myocardial infarction and low left ventricular ejection fraction. Given the size of the eligible population, the cost effectiveness of the ICD has substantial implications. Methods: Our research comprises the cost-effectiveness component of the randomized controlled trial, MADIT-II, based on utilization, cost, and survival information from 1,095 U.S. patients who were assigned randomly to receive an ICD or conventional medical care. Utilization data were converted to costs using a variety of national and hospital-specific data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (iCER) was calculated as the difference in discounted costs divided by the difference in discounted life expectancy within 3.5 years. Secondary analyses included projections of survival (using three alternative assumptions), corresponding cost assumptions, and the resulting cost-effectiveness ratios until 12 years after randomization. Results: During the 3.5-year period of the study, the average survival gain for the defibrillator arm was 0.167 years (2 months), the additional costs were $39,200, and the iCER was $235,000 per year-of-life saved. In three alternative projections to 12 years, this ratio ranged from $78,600 to $114,000. Conclusions: The estimated cost per life-year saved by the ICD in the MADIT-II study is relatively high at 3.5 years but is projected to be substantially lower over the course of longer time horizons. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to prospectively examine the role of clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, and electrophysiological variables as predictors of appropriate initial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) or death in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II (MADIT-II) population. Background: There is limited information regarding the determinants of appropriate ICD therapy in patients with reduced ventricular function after a myocardial infarction. Methods: We used secondary analysis in one arm of a multicenter randomized clinical trial in patients with a previous myocardial infarction and reduced left ventricular function. Results: We analyzed baseline and follow-up data on 719 patients enrolled in the ICD arm of the MADIT-II study. Appropriate ICD therapy was observed in 169 subjects. Clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, and electrophysiological variables, along with measures of clinical instability such as interim hospitalization for congestive heart failure (IH-CHF) and interim hospitalization for coronary events (IH-CE), were examined with proportional hazards models and Kaplan-Meier time-to-event curves before and after first interim hospitalization. Interim hospitalization-CHF, IH-CE, no beta-blockers, digitalis use, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) >25, body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2, and New York Heart Association functional class >II were associated with increased risk for appropriate ICD therapy for VT, VF, or death. In a multivariate (stepwise selection) analysis, IH-CHF was associated with an increased risk for the end point of either VT or VF (hazard ratio [HR] 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69 to 3.74, p < 0.001) and for the combined end point of VT, VF, or death (HR 2.97, 95% CI 2.15 to 4.09, p < 0.001). Interim hospitalization-CE was associated with an increased risk for VT, VF, or death (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.52, p = 0.02). Conclusions: These results provide important mechanistic information, suggesting that worsening clinical condition and cardiac instability, as reflected by an IH-CHF or IH-CE, are subsequently associated with a significant increase in the risk for appropriate ICD therapy (for VT/VF) and death. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: We conducted a study of chronic therapy with flecainide versus placebo in a small group of LQT-3 patients with the DeltaKPQ deletion to evaluate the safety and efficacy of flecainide in this genetic disorder. In vitro studies have shown that flecainide provides correction of the impaired inactivation associated with the DeltaKPQ deletion.Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted with flecainide and placebo in six male LQT-3 subjects with the DeltaKPQ deletion.Results: The lowest possible dose of flecainide associated with at least a 40 ms reduction in the QTc interval was determined in an initial open-label, dose-ranging investigation using one-fourth or half of the recommended maximal antiarrhythmic flecainide dose. QTc reduction was achieved with a flecainide dose of 1.5 mg/kg per day in 4 subjects and with 3.0 mg/kg per day in 2 subjects. Subjects were randomized to four 6-month alternating periods of flecainide and placebo therapy based on the open-label dose findings. Average QTc values during placebo and flecainide therapies were 534 ms and 503 ms, respectively, with an adjusted reduction in QTc of -27.1 ms (95% confidence interval: -36.8 ms to -17.4 ms; P<0.001) at a mean flecainide blood level of 0.11+/-0.05 microg/ml. Minimal prolongation in QRS occurred (mean: +2.5 ms), and there were no major adverse cardiac effects.Conclusions: Chronic low-dose flecainide significantly shortens the QTc interval in LQT-3 subjects with the DeltaKPQ mutation. No major adverse drug effects were observed with flecainide during this trial, but the sample size is not large enough to evaluate the safety of flecainide therapy in patients with this mutation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Location of Mutations in LQT1. Introduction: Recent data showed that long QT syndrome (LQTS) patients with mutations in the pore region of the HERG (LQT2) gene have significantly higher risk of cardiac events than subjects with mutations in the non-pore region. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is an association between the location of mutations in the KCNQ1 gene and cardiac events in LQT1 patients. Methods and Results: The study population consisted of 294 LQT1 patients with KCNQ1 gene mutations. Demographic, clinical, and follow-up information was compared among subjects with different locations of KCNQ1 mutations defined as pre-pore region including N-terminus (1–278), pore region (279–354), and post-pore region including C-terminus (>354). Cardiac events observed during follow-up from birth until age of last contact or age 40 years were defined as syncope, cardiac arrest, or sudden death. There were 164 (56%) LQT1 patients with pre-pore mutations, 101 (34%) with pore mutations, and 29 (10%) with post-pore mutations. QTc duration did not differ significantly among the three subgroups (mean QTc = 494, 487, and 501 ms, respectively). There was no significant difference between groups with regard to the risk of cardiac events by age 40 years. Conclusion: There are no significant differences in clinical presentation, ECG parameters, and cardiac events among LQT1 patients with different locations of KCNQ1 mutations. These findings indicate that factors other than location of mutation influence clinical phenotype in patients with LQT1 mutations. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 14, pp. 1149-1153, November 2003) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ICD in High-Risk LQTS Patients. Introduction: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are increasingly being used in high-risk long QT syndrome (LQTS) patients, but there are limited data regarding clinical experience with this therapeutic modality. The aim of this study is to describe the clinical characteristics of 125 LQTS patients treated with ICDs compared with LQTS patients having similar risk indications who were not treated with ICDs. Methods and Results: Among 125 LQTS patients with ICDs, there were 54 cardiac arrest survivors, 19 patients who had ICDs implanted due to recurrent syncope despite beta-blocker therapy, and 52 patients with ICDs implanted due to other reasons, including syncope and LQTS-related sudden death in a close family member. Patients with cardiac arrest and those with recurrent syncope despite beta-blocker therapy (n = 73) were compared to 161 LQTS patients who had similar indications (89 cardiac arrest and 72 recurrent syncope despite beta-blocker therapy) but did not receive ICDs. Total mortality was the endpoint of the analysis. There was 1 (1.3%) death in 73 ICD patients followed an average of 3 years, whereas there were 26 deaths (16%) in non-ICD patients during mean 8-year follow-up (P = 0.07 from log rank test from Kaplan-Meier curves). Conclusion: ICDs provide an important therapeutic option to prevent sudden arrhythmic death in high-risk LQTS patients. A long-term prospective study is needed to determine the benefit of this therapeutic modality in LQTS patients.(J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 14, pp. 337-341, April 2003). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. Hospitalization of nursing home residents is a growing, poorly defined problem. The purposes of this study were to define rates, patterns, costs, and outcomes of hospitalizations from nursing homes and to consider implications for reducing this problem as part of health care reform. Methods. Communitywide nursing home utilization review and hospital discharge data were used to define retrospectively a cohort of 2120 patients newly admitted to nursing homes; these patients were followed for 2 years to identify all hospitalizations. Resident characteristics were analyzed for predictors of hospitalization. Charges and outcomes were compared with hospitalization of community-dwelling elders. Results. Hospitalization rates were strikingly higher for intermediate vs skilled levels of care (566 and 346 per 1000 resident years, respectively). Approximately 40% of all hospitalizations occurred within 3 months of admission. No strong predictors were identified. Length of stay, charges, and mortality rates were higher than for hospitalizations from the community. Conclusions. Hospitalizations from nursing homes are not easily predicted but may in large part be prevented through health care reforms that integrate acute and long term care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The study was designed to develop a simple risk stratification score for primary therapy with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Background: Current guidelines recommend primary ICD therapy in patients with a low ejection fraction (EF). However, the benefit of the ICD in the low EF population may not be uniform. Methods: Best-subset proportional-hazards regression analysis was used to develop a simple clinical risk score for the end point of all-cause mortality in patients allocated to the conventional therapy arm of MADIT (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial)-II after excluding a pre-specified subgroup of very high-risk (VHR) patients (defined by blood urea nitrogen [BUN] ≥50 mg/dl and/or serum creatinine ≥2.5 mg/dl). The benefit of the ICD was then assessed within risk score categories and separately in VHR patients. Results: The selected risk score model comprised 5 clinical factors (New York Heart Association functional class >II, age >70 years, BUN >26 mg/dl, QRS duration >0.12 s, and atrial fibrillation). Crude mortality rates in the conventional group were 8% and 28% in patients with 0 and ≥1 risk factors, respectively, and 43% in VHR patients. Defibrillator therapy was associated with a 49% reduction in the risk of death (p < 0.001) among patients with ≥1 risk factors (n = 786), whereas no ICD benefit was identified in patients with 0 risk factors (n = 345; hazard ratio 0.96; p = 0.91) and in VHR patients (n = 60; hazard ratio 1.00; p > 0.99). Conclusions: Our data suggest a U-shaped pattern for ICD efficacy in the low-EF population, with pronounced benefit in intermediate-risk patients and attenuated efficacy in lower- and higher-risk subsets. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In the second Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial, patients with a previous myocardial infarction and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤0.30 benefited significantly from prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement. Diabetic patients who had a myocardial infarction had a worse prognosis compared with nondiabetics. The present study used data from the second Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial to assess the efficacy of ICD placement on survival in diabetic patients. Of the 1,232 patients in the second Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial, 489 were characterized as diabetic. They were more likely to be New York Heart Association class II to IV, be hypertensive, have renal dysfunction, have an increased body mass index, and to take diuretic drugs. Diabetic patients had a 24% greater adjusted risk of death than nondiabetic patients. The hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of death in patients treated with the ICD compared with conventional therapy was similar in diabetics (HR 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38 to 0.98) and nondiabetics (HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.05), with no evidence of interaction. Thus, diabetic patients derive a similar benefit from ICD therapy despite being sicker and having a higher mortality rate overall. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) is highly effective in reducing mortality among patients at risk for fatal arrhythmias, but inappropriate ICD activations are frequent, with potential adverse effects. Methods: We randomly assigned 1500 patients with a primary-prevention indication to receive an ICD with one of three programming configurations. The primary objective was to determine whether programmed high-rate therapy (with a 2.5-second delay before the initiation of therapy at a heart rate of ≥200 beats per minute) or delayed therapy (with a 60-second delay at 170 to 199 beats per minute, a 12-second delay at 200 to 249 beats per minute, and a 2.5-second delay at ≥250 beats per minute) was associated with a decrease in the number of patients with a first occurrence of inappropriate antitachycardia pacing or shocks, as compared with conventional programming (with a 2.5-second delay at 170 to 199 beats per minute and a 1.0-second delay at ≥200 beats per minute). Results: During an average follow-up of 1.4 years, high-rate therapy and delayed ICD therapy, as compared with conventional device programming, were associated with reductions in a first occurrence of inappropriate therapy (hazard ratio with high-rate therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13 to 0.34; P<0.001; hazard ratio with delayed therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.40; P<0.001) and reductions in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio with high-rate therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.85; P=0.01; hazard ratio with delayed therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.02; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in procedure-related adverse events among the three treatment groups. Conclusions: Programming of ICD therapies for tachyarrhythmias of 200 beats per minute or higher or with a prolonged delay in therapy at 170 beats per minute or higher, as compared with conventional programming, was associated with reductions in inappropriate therapy and all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. (Funded by Boston Scientific; MADIT-RIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00947310.) [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objectives: This study compared the quality of life (QOL) of patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) to patients with an ICD only. Background: CRT with ICD is associated with a reduction in heart failure risk among minimally symptomatic patients. It is unknown whether this improves QOL. Methods: This study uses the MADIT-CRT (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) data. The MADIT-CRT enrolled 1,820 patients at 110 centers across 14 countries. Patients had ischemic cardiomyopathy (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class I or II) or nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NYHA functional class II only), sinus rhythm, an ejection fraction of 30% or less, and prolonged intraventricular conduction with a QRS duration of 130 ms or more. QOL was evaluated on the 1,699 patients with baseline and follow-up measures using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Six dimensions (Physical Limitation, Symptom Stability, Symptom Frequency, Symptom Burden, Quality of Life, and Social Limitations) and 3 summary scores (Total Symptom, Clinical Summary, and Overall Summary) were analyzed. Results: During an average follow-up of 2.4 years, the CRT-ICD group had greater improvement than the ICD-only group on all KCCQ measures (p < 0.05 on each scale). These differences were significant among patients with left bundle branch block conduction disturbance (n = 1,204, p < 0.01 on each scale), but not among patients without left bundle branch block (n = 494). Conclusions: Compared with patients with ICD only, CRT-ICD is associated with greater improvement in QOL among relatively asymptomatic patients, specifically among those with left bundle branch conduction disturbance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) on the risks of first and recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmic events (VTEs) in the MADIT-CRT. Background: Reverse remodeling associated with CRT-D therapy was suggested to reduce arrhythmic risk. However, the effect of the device on the risk of recurrent VTEs among patients who experience a first arrhythmic event has not been investigated. Methods: The CRT-D versus defibrillator-only risks for first and subsequent fast VTEs (>180 beats/min) were assessed by Cox proportional hazards and Andersen-Gill proportional intensity regression modeling, respectively, in efficacy analyses recognizing active device-type during follow-up. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that CRT-D was associated with a significant 29% (p = 0.003) reduction in the risk of a first VTE, with a pronounced effect among patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.58; p < 0.001) and no significant effect among non-LBBB patients (HR: 1.05; p = 0.82, p for the difference = 0.02). Patients with LBBB who experienced a first VTE had no change in the risk of subsequent VTEs with CRT-D (HR: 0.98; p = 0.85). In contrast, the risk of recurrent VTEs with CRT-D was significantly increased among non-LBBB patients (HR: 3.62; p = 0.002, p for the difference = 0.009). Recurrent VTEs increased the risk of subsequent heart failure or death. Conclusions: In MADIT-CRT, active treatment with CRT-D was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of life-threatening VTEs. However, our findings suggest that CRT-D does not reduce the risk of subsequent VTEs in patients who experience a first arrhythmic event and may increase subsequent arrhythmic risk in non-LBBB patients. (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy [MADIT-CRT]; NCT00180271) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]