Bert Vandenberk, Marius Brusselmans, Gabor Voros, Pieter Martens, Sebastian Ingelaere, Pascal Betschart, Jens-Uwe Voigt, Matthias Dupont, Alexander Breitenstein, Jan Steffel, Rik Willems, Frank Ruschitzka, Wilfried Mullens, Sander Trenson, Stephan Winnik
{"title":"心脏再同步化治疗中患者特异性生存调节剂的益处-一项多中心相互作用分析。","authors":"Bert Vandenberk, Marius Brusselmans, Gabor Voros, Pieter Martens, Sebastian Ingelaere, Pascal Betschart, Jens-Uwe Voigt, Matthias Dupont, Alexander Breitenstein, Jan Steffel, Rik Willems, Frank Ruschitzka, Wilfried Mullens, Sander Trenson, Stephan Winnik","doi":"10.1002/ehf2.15367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a key intervention for patients with heart failure. The choice between a CRT with defibrillator therapy (CRT-D) and a CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P) is influenced by individual clinical characteristics. This study explores the interaction between these clinical variables and the benefit of CRT-D versus CRT-P on all-cause mortality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>All patients who underwent CRT implantation in three European centres were included in a multicentre, retrospective registry. The impact of clinical variables on all-cause mortality was analysed using interaction tests within multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. Significant interactions were explored to assess how patient characteristics modify the effect of CRT-D compared with CRT-P.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 2271 patients with CRT implantation were included. CRT-D was associated with a 35% reduction in all-cause mortality compared with CRT-P [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.80]. Significant interactions were observed for left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology (<i>P</i> = 0.028), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, <i>P</i> = 0.025) and renal function (<i>P</i> = 0.019). The survival benefit of CRT-D was pronounced in patients with LBBB (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.44–0.73) but was not significant in those without LBBB (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.59–1.10). For LVEF at implant, CRT-D provided benefit between 17.9% and 37.6%. Similarly, CRT-D improved outcomes in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >31.8 mL/min but not in those with more advanced renal impairment. No interaction was observed with age at implant (<i>P</i> = 0.286).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This study provides insights into the benefits of CRT-D over CRT-P, identifying LBBB morphology, LVEF and renal function as key covariates associated with implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) therapy's benefit.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11864,"journal":{"name":"ESC Heart Failure","volume":"12 5","pages":"3579-3588"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ehf2.15367","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient-specific modifiers of survival benefit in cardiac resynchronization therapy - A multicentre interaction analysis\",\"authors\":\"Bert Vandenberk, Marius Brusselmans, Gabor Voros, Pieter Martens, Sebastian Ingelaere, Pascal Betschart, Jens-Uwe Voigt, Matthias Dupont, Alexander Breitenstein, Jan Steffel, Rik Willems, Frank Ruschitzka, Wilfried Mullens, Sander Trenson, Stephan Winnik\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ehf2.15367\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a key intervention for patients with heart failure. The choice between a CRT with defibrillator therapy (CRT-D) and a CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P) is influenced by individual clinical characteristics. This study explores the interaction between these clinical variables and the benefit of CRT-D versus CRT-P on all-cause mortality.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>All patients who underwent CRT implantation in three European centres were included in a multicentre, retrospective registry. The impact of clinical variables on all-cause mortality was analysed using interaction tests within multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. Significant interactions were explored to assess how patient characteristics modify the effect of CRT-D compared with CRT-P.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 2271 patients with CRT implantation were included. CRT-D was associated with a 35% reduction in all-cause mortality compared with CRT-P [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.80]. Significant interactions were observed for left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology (<i>P</i> = 0.028), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, <i>P</i> = 0.025) and renal function (<i>P</i> = 0.019). The survival benefit of CRT-D was pronounced in patients with LBBB (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.44–0.73) but was not significant in those without LBBB (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.59–1.10). For LVEF at implant, CRT-D provided benefit between 17.9% and 37.6%. Similarly, CRT-D improved outcomes in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >31.8 mL/min but not in those with more advanced renal impairment. No interaction was observed with age at implant (<i>P</i> = 0.286).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study provides insights into the benefits of CRT-D over CRT-P, identifying LBBB morphology, LVEF and renal function as key covariates associated with implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) therapy's benefit.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ESC Heart Failure\",\"volume\":\"12 5\",\"pages\":\"3579-3588\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ehf2.15367\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ESC Heart Failure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ehf2.15367\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESC Heart Failure","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ehf2.15367","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:心脏再同步化治疗(CRT)是心力衰竭患者的关键干预措施。在CRT加除颤器治疗(CRT- d)和CRT加起搏器治疗(CRT- p)之间的选择受个体临床特征的影响。本研究探讨了这些临床变量与CRT-D与CRT-P对全因死亡率的益处之间的相互作用。方法:所有在三个欧洲中心接受CRT植入的患者纳入多中心回顾性登记。使用多变量Cox比例风险模型中的相互作用试验分析临床变量对全因死亡率的影响。探讨了显著的相互作用,以评估患者特征如何改变CRT-D与CRT-P的效果。结果:共纳入2271例CRT植入患者。与CRT-P相比,CRT-D与全因死亡率降低35%相关[危险比(HR) 0.65;95%置信区间(CI) 0.53-0.80]。左束支阻滞(LBBB)形态学(P = 0.028)、左室射血分数(LVEF, P = 0.025)和肾功能(P = 0.019)显著相互作用。在LBBB患者中,CRT-D的生存获益显著(HR 0.57;95% CI 0.44-0.73),但在没有LBBB的患者中无统计学意义(HR 0.81;95% ci 0.59-1.10)。对于种植体的LVEF, CRT-D提供了17.9%至37.6%的获益。同样,CRT-D改善了肾小球滤过率估计为31.8 mL/min的患者的预后,但对晚期肾损害患者没有改善。与种植年龄无交互作用(P = 0.286)。结论:本研究揭示了CRT-D优于CRT-P的益处,确定了LBBB形态、LVEF和肾功能是与植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)治疗益处相关的关键协变量。
Patient-specific modifiers of survival benefit in cardiac resynchronization therapy - A multicentre interaction analysis
Background
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a key intervention for patients with heart failure. The choice between a CRT with defibrillator therapy (CRT-D) and a CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P) is influenced by individual clinical characteristics. This study explores the interaction between these clinical variables and the benefit of CRT-D versus CRT-P on all-cause mortality.
Methods
All patients who underwent CRT implantation in three European centres were included in a multicentre, retrospective registry. The impact of clinical variables on all-cause mortality was analysed using interaction tests within multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. Significant interactions were explored to assess how patient characteristics modify the effect of CRT-D compared with CRT-P.
Results
A total of 2271 patients with CRT implantation were included. CRT-D was associated with a 35% reduction in all-cause mortality compared with CRT-P [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.80]. Significant interactions were observed for left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology (P = 0.028), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, P = 0.025) and renal function (P = 0.019). The survival benefit of CRT-D was pronounced in patients with LBBB (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.44–0.73) but was not significant in those without LBBB (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.59–1.10). For LVEF at implant, CRT-D provided benefit between 17.9% and 37.6%. Similarly, CRT-D improved outcomes in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >31.8 mL/min but not in those with more advanced renal impairment. No interaction was observed with age at implant (P = 0.286).
Conclusions
This study provides insights into the benefits of CRT-D over CRT-P, identifying LBBB morphology, LVEF and renal function as key covariates associated with implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) therapy's benefit.
期刊介绍:
ESC Heart Failure is the open access journal of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology dedicated to the advancement of knowledge in the field of heart failure. The journal aims to improve the understanding, prevention, investigation and treatment of heart failure. Molecular and cellular biology, pathology, physiology, electrophysiology, pharmacology, as well as the clinical, social and population sciences all form part of the discipline that is heart failure. Accordingly, submission of manuscripts on basic, translational, clinical and population sciences is invited. Original contributions on nursing, care of the elderly, primary care, health economics and other specialist fields related to heart failure are also welcome, as are case reports that highlight interesting aspects of heart failure care and treatment.