Ventricular Arrhythmia Risk Stratification Among Patients With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices.

IF 1.1
Circulation reports Pub Date : 2025-08-26 eCollection Date: 2025-10-10 DOI:10.1253/circrep.CR-25-0115
Nobuhiko Ueda, Kohei Ishibashi, Takashi Noda, Satoshi Oka, Yuichiro Miyazaki, Akinori Wakamiya, Kenzaburo Nakajima, Tsukasa Kamakura, Mitsuru Wada, Yuko Inoue, Koji Miyamoto, Satoshi Nagase, Takeshi Aiba, Hideaki Kanzaki, Chisato Izumi, Teruo Noguchi, Kengo Kusano
{"title":"Ventricular Arrhythmia Risk Stratification Among Patients With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices.","authors":"Nobuhiko Ueda, Kohei Ishibashi, Takashi Noda, Satoshi Oka, Yuichiro Miyazaki, Akinori Wakamiya, Kenzaburo Nakajima, Tsukasa Kamakura, Mitsuru Wada, Yuko Inoue, Koji Miyamoto, Satoshi Nagase, Takeshi Aiba, Hideaki Kanzaki, Chisato Izumi, Teruo Noguchi, Kengo Kusano","doi":"10.1253/circrep.CR-25-0115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction have a higher risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) compared with those without, and are candidates for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) decreases the risk of VA; however, selection of a suitable CRT device remains challenging.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>In 678 patients with a CRT/ICD device and LV dysfunction, we investigated 325 CRT and 142 ICD patients for primary prevention. VA was defined as lasting ≥30 s or being treated with an ICD. CRT non-responders were defined as patients without reduced LV end-systolic volume ≥15%. During the follow-up period, 98 (21%) patients had a VA event (CRT 71 [22%] vs. ICD 27 [19%]; P=0.49). The VA risk score was calculated by summing values for non-left bundle branch block, left atrial diameter >45 mm, persistent atrial fibrillation, male sex, LV ejection fraction <25%, and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Our results showed that the VA risk score stratified the risk of VA among CRT patients (P<0.01), but was not significant for ICD patients (P=0.24). Patients with a VA risk score ≥4 (divided by receiver operating characteristic analysis) had a higher risk of VA among CRT patients (log rank P<0.01); however, it was not significant for ICD patients (log rank P=0.71).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The VA risk score could be a useful indicator for VA among CRT candidates.</p>","PeriodicalId":94305,"journal":{"name":"Circulation reports","volume":"7 10","pages":"861-868"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12510959/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1253/circrep.CR-25-0115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction have a higher risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) compared with those without, and are candidates for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) decreases the risk of VA; however, selection of a suitable CRT device remains challenging.

Methods and results: In 678 patients with a CRT/ICD device and LV dysfunction, we investigated 325 CRT and 142 ICD patients for primary prevention. VA was defined as lasting ≥30 s or being treated with an ICD. CRT non-responders were defined as patients without reduced LV end-systolic volume ≥15%. During the follow-up period, 98 (21%) patients had a VA event (CRT 71 [22%] vs. ICD 27 [19%]; P=0.49). The VA risk score was calculated by summing values for non-left bundle branch block, left atrial diameter >45 mm, persistent atrial fibrillation, male sex, LV ejection fraction <25%, and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Our results showed that the VA risk score stratified the risk of VA among CRT patients (P<0.01), but was not significant for ICD patients (P=0.24). Patients with a VA risk score ≥4 (divided by receiver operating characteristic analysis) had a higher risk of VA among CRT patients (log rank P<0.01); however, it was not significant for ICD patients (log rank P=0.71).

Conclusions: The VA risk score could be a useful indicator for VA among CRT candidates.

心脏再同步化治疗装置患者室性心律失常风险分层。
背景:有左心室功能障碍的患者发生室性心律失常(VA)的风险高于无左心室功能障碍的患者,是植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)的候选者。对心脏再同步化治疗(CRT)的反应降低了VA的风险;然而,选择合适的CRT设备仍然具有挑战性。方法与结果:在678例使用CRT/ICD装置并伴有左室功能障碍的患者中,我们调查了325例CRT和142例ICD患者进行一级预防。VA定义为持续≥30 s或接受ICD治疗。CRT无应答定义为左室收缩期末期容积减小≥15%。随访期间,98例(21%)患者发生VA事件(CRT 71例[22%]vs ICD 27例[19%];P=0.49)。通过非左束支传导阻滞、左房内径bbb45 mm、持续性心房颤动、男性、左室射血分数的累加值计算VA风险评分。结论:VA风险评分可作为评价CRT候选者VA的有效指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信