TY - JOUR
T1 - Survival and heart failure hospitalization in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without a defibrillator for primary prevention in Japan ― Analysis of the Japan cardiac device treatment registry database
AU - Members of the Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) Committee of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society
AU - Yokoshiki, Hisashi
AU - Shimizu, Akihiko
AU - Mitsuhashi, Takeshi
AU - Furushima, Hiroshi
AU - Sekiguchi, Yukio
AU - Manaka, Tetsuyuki
AU - Nishii, Nobuhiro
AU - Ueyama, Takeshi
AU - Morita, Norishige
AU - Okamura, Hideo
AU - Nitta, Takashi
AU - Hirao, Kenzo
AU - Okumura, Ken
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, Japanese Circulation Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Background: Randomized control trials comparing the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, with (CRT-D) or without (CRT-P) a defibrillator, are scarce in heart failure patients with no prior sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Methods and Results: The Japan Cardiac Device Treatment Registry (JCDTR) has data for 2714 CRT-D and 555 CRT-P recipients for primary prevention with an implantation date between January 2011 and August 2015. Of these patients, follow-up data were available for 717. Over the mean follow-up period of 21 months, Kaplan-Meier curves of survival free of combined events for all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization (whichever came first) diverged between the CRT-D (n=620) and CRT-P (n=97) groups with a rate of 22% vs. 42%, respectively, at 24 months (P=0.0011). However, this apparent benefit of CRT-D over CRT-P was no longer significant after adjustment for covariates. With regard to mortality, including heart failure death or sudden cardiac death, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups. Conclusions: In patients without sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias enrolled in the JCDTR, there was no significant difference in mortality between the CRT-D and CRT-P groups, despite a lower trend in CRT-D recipients. This study was limited by large clinical and demographic differences between the 2 groups.
AB - Background: Randomized control trials comparing the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, with (CRT-D) or without (CRT-P) a defibrillator, are scarce in heart failure patients with no prior sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Methods and Results: The Japan Cardiac Device Treatment Registry (JCDTR) has data for 2714 CRT-D and 555 CRT-P recipients for primary prevention with an implantation date between January 2011 and August 2015. Of these patients, follow-up data were available for 717. Over the mean follow-up period of 21 months, Kaplan-Meier curves of survival free of combined events for all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization (whichever came first) diverged between the CRT-D (n=620) and CRT-P (n=97) groups with a rate of 22% vs. 42%, respectively, at 24 months (P=0.0011). However, this apparent benefit of CRT-D over CRT-P was no longer significant after adjustment for covariates. With regard to mortality, including heart failure death or sudden cardiac death, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups. Conclusions: In patients without sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias enrolled in the JCDTR, there was no significant difference in mortality between the CRT-D and CRT-P groups, despite a lower trend in CRT-D recipients. This study was limited by large clinical and demographic differences between the 2 groups.
KW - CRT defibrillator (CRT-D)
KW - CRT pacemaker (CRT-P)
KW - Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)
KW - Primary prevention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85035220873&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85035220873&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1253/circj.CJ-17-0234
DO - 10.1253/circj.CJ-17-0234
M3 - Article
C2 - 28626201
AN - SCOPUS:85035220873
SN - 1346-9843
VL - 81
SP - 1798
EP - 1806
JO - Circulation Journal
JF - Circulation Journal
IS - 12
ER -