Search

Introduction: Patients eligible for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy are faced with a complex decision that needs a clear understanding of the risks and benefits of such an intervention. In this study, our goal was to explore the documentation of primary prevention ICD discussions in the electronic medical records (EMRs) of eligible patients., Methods: In 1523 patients who met criteria for primary prevention ICD therapy between 2013 and 2015, we reviewed patient charts for ICD-related documentation: "mention" by physicians or "discussion" with patient/family. The attitude of the physician and the patient/family toward ICD therapy during discussions was categorized into negative, neutral, or positive preference. Patients were followed to the end-point of ICD implantation., Results: Over a median follow-up of 442 days, 486 patients (32%) received an ICD. ICD was mentioned in the charts of 1105 (73%) patients, and a discussion with the patient/family about the risks and benefits of ICD was documented in 706 (46%) charts. On multivariable analyses, positive cardiologist (hazard ratio [HR]: 7.9, 95% confidence of intervals [CI]: 1.0-59.7, P < .05), electrophysiologist (HR: 7.7, 95% CI: 1.9-31.7, P < .001), and patient/family (HR: 9.9, 95% CI: 6.2-15.7, P < .001) preferences toward ICD therapy during the first documented ICD discussion were independently associated with ICD implantation., Conclusions: In a large cohort of patients eligible for primary prevention ICD therapy, a discussion with the patient/family about the risks and benefits of ICD implantation was documented in less than 50% of the charts. More consistent documentation of the shared decision making around ICD therapy is needed., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapy for heart failure and can be delivered through a CRT pacemaker (CRT-P) or a CRT defibrillator (CRT-D). CRT-P devices are smaller and less expensive, have better battery longevity, and have been subject to fewer recalls and advisories but cannot deliver high-energy shocks to terminate potentially lethal ventricular arrhythmias. As published guidelines do not distinguish between CRT-P and CRT-D indications, we examined the practice of prescribing these devices in older women and men with heart failure. A total of 512 CRT recipients (age ≥75 years, 26% women, 21% CRT-P) were included in this analysis. Baseline characteristics were collected on all patients, and overall survival was compared by gender and type of CRT device implanted. Women were more likely to receive CRT-Ps than men (26% vs 19%). Men with CRT-Ps were significantly older than women with CRT-Ps and both men and women with CRT-Ds (p = 0.04). In addition, women had lower all-cause mortality compared with men (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, confidence interval [CI] 0.58 to 0.99, p = 0.04), mainly among CRT-P recipients (HR 0.48, CI 0.26 to 0.8, p = 0.02), but this association was attenuated after adjusting for differences in patient characteristics (HR 0.56, CI 0.26 to 1.18, p = 0.13). In conclusion, women are more likely to receive CRT-Ps than men. Whether this difference is driven by patient preference or physician biases remains unclear. Women with CRT, particularly CRT-Ps, have a better overall survival than men. These differences, which may be driven by unbalanced baseline characteristics of patients or by differences in gender response to CRT, deserve further investigation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and left bundle-branch block (LBBB) often benefit markedly from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Cardiac resynchronization therapy responders have a lower risk of appropriate device shocks from CRT-defibrillators (CRT-D) than do non-responders. Larger baseline left ventricular (LV) dimensions may be associated with less CRT response and thus greater risk of appropriate shocks., Methods and Results: We analysed all (n = 249; 55% female) primary prevention CRT-D recipients at our institution with LBBB, NICM, and measured LV dimensions prior to device implant for the outcomes of (i) appropriate shocks, (ii) any appropriate tachyarrhythmia therapies, and (iii) risk of death, transplant, or left ventricular assist device (LVAD). During 59 months (interquartile range 21.5-91.5) follow-up, 19 (8%) patients received ≥1 appropriate shock, and 67 (27%) patients died, received a transplant, or required LVAD. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis of LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) per meter height vs. appropriate shock(s) revealed an area under the curve of 0.75 (95% CI 0.65-0.85; P < 0.001). No patient with indexed LVEDD <3.36 cm/m (n = 76) received a shock. There was no statistically significant difference in risk of death, transplant, or LVAD (corrected HR 1.67, 95% CI 0.90-3.03; P = 0.103) in patients with indexed LVEDD above this cut-off compared to those with smaller dimension. Among 102 patients with paired quantitative echocardiograms, there was no difference in LVEF change between patients with indexed LVEDD <3.36 cm/m (n = 27; median 11%) and larger (n = 75; median 14%)., Conclusion: Patients with LVEDD <3.36 cm/m height prior to CRT-D implant in the setting of NICM and LBBB have minimal risk of appropriate shocks but similar risk of death, transplant- and LVAD and similar extent of LV functional improvement as patients with larger LVEDD. CRT-pacemakers may be appropriate in such patients., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Very elderly patients have not been well-represented in the randomized trials that established the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure (HF) patients. We therefore compared clinical outcomes in CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) recipients ≥80 and <80 years old., Methods and Results: We compared mortality and time to first appropriate shock in 258 consecutive CRT-D patients ≥80 years old with New York Heart Association II-IV HF, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, QRS duration ≥120 ms, and no prior sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias to 1058 patients <80 years old implanted with CRT-D during the same timeframe. Comorbidities and medical therapy differed significantly between the groups. During 52 ± 36 months, 123 (48%) patients ≥80 and 474 (45%) patients <80 died; mortality was significantly higher among patients ≥80 [corrected hazard ratio (HR) 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-1.72; P = 0.003]. Among 258 patients ≥80 with device follow-up, only 20 (8%) received an appropriate shock compared with 172 (17%) shocks in 1053 patients <80 years old. Time to first appropriate shock was significantly shorter in patients <80 (corrected HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30-0.87, P = 0.013). Older patients experienced 14 inappropriate shocks, and while life-threatening device complications were rare, complications related to the high-power components of the CRT-D system were not infrequent (n = 11)., Conclusion: Mortality among CRT-D recipients ≥80 years old is higher than in younger patients but is not excessive. The risk of appropriate device shocks in older patients is relatively low and significantly less than in younger patients. These observations suggest that CRT-pacemakers should be given due consideration in elderly HF patients., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) is commonly associated with symptomatic improvement in response to standard medical therapy, yet there remains a substantial risk of rehospitalization and death. Clinically stable outpatients and decompensated inpatients represent two types of patients with chronic heart failure. In the former, treatment of common heart rhythm disorders with nonpharmacologic electrophysiology-based interventions is of substantial benefit in select patients. The potential benefits of these interventions in the hospitalized setting are not well studied. In this review, current knowledge is discussed and future research directions are suggested with nonpharmacologic electrophysiology-based interventions to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with patients with HHF., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been demonstrated to improve mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic, stable heart failure who have reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and prolonged QRS duration. Patients with acute heart failure syndromes (AHFS) have been excluded from major CRT trials. The potential benefits and risks of implementation of these devices in the AHFS setting are largely unknown. In this review, we discuss the role that early implementation of CRT may have in improving postdischarge outcomes. In addition, we also discuss the potential adverse consequences of inserting these devices in patients who are in the tenuous clinical state of AHFS.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators have proven efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in both the primary and the secondary prevention settings. All randomized trials demonstrating this benefit have been conducted in outpatients with stable heart failure symptoms. Whether implantable cardioverter-defibrillators confer a benefit when implemented in patients with chronically reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in the acute heart failure setting is unknown. The purpose of this document is to review the existing literature related to this subject.

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) status at the time of hospitalization for worsening heart failure (HF) with postdischarge events in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. We conducted an analysis of 4133 patients hospitalized for HF with left ventricular ejection fraction 40% or less in EVEREST. The final analysis included patients without an electrophysiological device (n = 3102) and those with an ICD (n = 600) at the time of enrollment. During a median follow-up of 300 days, all-cause mortality was 22.9% in the no device group and 35.2% in the ICD group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-1.89). Rehospitalization for HF was 27.0% in the no device group and 46.8% in the ICD group (HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.92-2.52). After adjustment for multiple variables, the rates for all-cause mortality were similar (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.83-1.22), but the ICD group had elevated rates of HF hospitalizations compared with the no device group (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14-1.60). In patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, an ICD at presentation for hospitalization for worsening HF was associated with similar rates of death but higher rates of rehospitalization for HF. Given our findings, further studies should investigate optimization of care in patients already implanted with an ICD as well as the role of ICD implantation during or soon after hospitalization for HF in patients not yet implanted.

Context: Hospitalization for heart failure is associated with high postdischarge mortality and morbidity. The predictive value of the QRS duration during admission for heart failure has not been well studied., Objective: To investigate the predictive value of the QRS duration in patients hospitalized for heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective, post hoc analysis from the Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure Outcome Study With Tolvaptan (EVEREST), an event-driven, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients hospitalized for heart failure and having an LVEF of 40% or less. A total of 4133 patients were enrolled at 359 North American, South American, and European sites between October 7, 2003, and February 3, 2006. After excluding 1029 patients with a pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, or both at enrollment and 142 patients without a reported baseline QRS duration, 2962 patients were included in the analysis: 1641 had a normal QRS duration (< 120 ms) and 1321 had a prolonged QRS duration (> or = 120 ms)., Main Outcome Measures: Dual primary end points were all-cause mortality and the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure., Results: During a median follow-up of 9.9 months, all-cause mortality was 18.7% for patients with a normal baseline QRS duration and 28.1% for patients with a prolonged baseline QRS duration (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-1.87). The composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure was 32.4% for patients with a baseline QRS duration less than 120 ms and 41.6% for patients with a baseline QRS duration of 120 ms or greater (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.58). The increased risk associated with prolonged QRS duration was confirmed after adjusting for multiple variables for all-cause mortality (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.50) and the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.10-1.49). Only 105 patients (3.6%) who presented with a prolonged baseline QRS duration had a normal QRS duration on their last inpatient electrocardiogram., Conclusion: A prolonged QRS duration appears common in patients with reduced LVEF who are hospitalized for heart failure and is an independent predictor of high postdischarge morbidity and mortality.

Background Characteristics and outcomes of concurrently diagnosed new rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) and new heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are not well described. Methods A retrospective cohort study of subjects referred for expedited transesophageal echocardiography-guided rhythm-control strategies for concurrent new rapid AF/AFL and new LVEF ≤ 40% diagnosed during the same admission was analyzed. Results Twenty-five subjects (median age 57 years; 96% male; 96% Caucasian; median CHA2DS2-VASc = 2) presented with new AF (n = 18) or AFL (n = 7) with rapid ventricular rate (median 135 beats/min) and new reduced LVEF (median 27%; range, 10-37.5%). Seven (28%) subjects had left atrial appendage thrombi (LAAT) and five (20%) subjects had heavy or binge alcohol use. Baseline characteristics were similar between those with and without LAAT. Thirteen subjects with AF and without LAAT underwent direct-current cardioversion (DCCV) and 10 (77%) had AF recurrence within 90 days. Improvement of long-term LVEF to >40% was comparable for subjects with and without initial LAAT (83% vs 94%; P = 0.46). Three of four subjects who received primary prophylaxis implantable cardioverter-defibrillators improved their LVEF to >35% after sinus rhythm maintenance. The median long-term follow-up time was 3.0 years. Conclusions Subjects with concurrently diagnosed new rapid AF/AFL and new reduced LVEF are characterized by a high prevalence of LAAT and significant alcohol use. AF subjects without initial LAAT who underwent DCCV had a high 90-day AF recurrence rate. The presence of LAAT did not have a prognosticative effect on eventual LVEF improvement, which was observed in almost all subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Very elderly patients have not been well-represented in the randomized trials that established the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure (HF) patients. We therefore compared clinical outcomes in CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) recipients ≥80 and <80 years old.Methods and Results: We compared mortality and time to first appropriate shock in 258 consecutive CRT-D patients ≥80 years old with New York Heart Association II-IV HF, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, QRS duration ≥120 ms, and no prior sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias to 1058 patients <80 years old implanted with CRT-D during the same timeframe. Comorbidities and medical therapy differed significantly between the groups. During 52 ± 36 months, 123 (48%) patients ≥80 and 474 (45%) patients <80 died; mortality was significantly higher among patients ≥80 [corrected hazard ratio (HR) 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-1.72; P = 0.003]. Among 258 patients ≥80 with device follow-up, only 20 (8%) received an appropriate shock compared with 172 (17%) shocks in 1053 patients <80 years old. Time to first appropriate shock was significantly shorter in patients <80 (corrected HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30-0.87, P = 0.013). Older patients experienced 14 inappropriate shocks, and while life-threatening device complications were rare, complications related to the high-power components of the CRT-D system were not infrequent (n = 11).Conclusion: Mortality among CRT-D recipients ≥80 years old is higher than in younger patients but is not excessive. The risk of appropriate device shocks in older patients is relatively low and significantly less than in younger patients. These observations suggest that CRT-pacemakers should be given due consideration in elderly HF patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]