3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Comparison of four LBBB definitions for predicting mortality in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is considered an important prognostic parameter in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We aimed to evaluate, in a sizeable cohort of patients with CRT, long‐term mortality, and morbidity according to four different electrocardiographic definitions of LBBB. This longitudinal cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent CRT device implantation in our institution in years 2006–2014. Two endpoints were assessed: (a) death from any cause or urgent heart transplantation, and (b) death from any cause or heart failure admission. All preimplantation ECGs were analyzed by three physicians blinded to outcome and categorized as LBBB or non‐LBBB according to four definitions. A total of 552 CRT patients entered survival analysis. According to the conventional definition, 350 (63.4%) patients had LBBB, and the Marriott, WHO/AHA, and Strauss definitions identified LBBB in 254 (46.0%), 218 (39.5%) and 226 (40.9%) patients, respectively. During the 9 years of observation, 232 patients died, the combined endpoint was met by 292 patients. The Strauss LBBB definition was significantly better to the other definitions in predicting survival (Kaplan–Meier analysis with comparison of C‐statistics). Multivariate Cox regression model showed that LBBB was the major determinant of all‐cause mortality with the Strauss definition having the lowest hazard ratio (0.51) of the four studied definitions. Criteria included in various definitions of LBBB result in a diagnosis of LBBB in divergent groups of patients. Differences in LBBB definitions have clinical consequences, as patients without ‘complete/true’ LBBB probably get no mortality benefit from CRT.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Defining left bundle branch block in the era of cardiac resynchronization therapy.

          Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has emerged as an attractive intervention to improve left ventricular mechanical function by changing the sequence of electrical activation. Unfortunately, many patients receiving CRT do not benefit but are subjected to device complications and costs. Thus, there is a need for better selection criteria. Current criteria for CRT eligibility include a QRS duration ≥ 120 ms. However, QRS morphology is not considered, although it can indicate the cause of delayed conduction. Recent studies have suggested that only patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) benefit from CRT, and not patients with right bundle branch block or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay. The authors review the pathophysiologic and clinical evidence supporting why only patients with complete LBBB benefit from CRT. Furthermore, they review how the threshold of 120 ms to define LBBB was derived subjectively at a time when criteria for LBBB and right bundle branch block were mistakenly reversed. Three key studies over the past 65 years have suggested that 1/3 of patients diagnosed with LBBB by conventional electrocardiographic criteria may not have true complete LBBB, but likely have a combination of left ventricular hypertrophy and left anterior fascicular block. On the basis of additional insights from computer simulations, the investigators propose stricter criteria for complete LBBB that include a QRS duration ≥ 140 ms for men and ≥ 130 ms for women, along with mid-QRS notching or slurring in ≥ 2 contiguous leads. Further studies are needed to reinvestigate the electrocardiographic criteria for complete LBBB and the implications of these criteria for selecting patients for CRT. Published by Elsevier Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            An individual patient meta-analysis of five randomized trials assessing the effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy on morbidity and mortality in patients with symptomatic heart failure

            Aims Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with or without a defibrillator reduces morbidity and mortality in selected patients with heart failure (HF) but response can be variable. We sought to identify pre-implantation variables that predict the response to CRT in a meta-analysis using individual patient-data. Methods and results An individual patient meta-analysis of five randomized trials, funded by Medtronic, comparing CRT either with no active device or with a defibrillator was conducted, including the following baseline variables: age, sex, New York Heart Association class, aetiology, QRS morphology, QRS duration, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and systolic blood pressure. Outcomes were all-cause mortality and first hospitalization for HF or death. Of 3782 patients in sinus rhythm, median (inter-quartile range) age was 66 (58–73) years, QRS duration was 160 (146–176) ms, LVEF was 24 (20–28)%, and 78% had left bundle branch block. A multivariable model suggested that only QRS duration predicted the magnitude of the effect of CRT on outcomes. Further analysis produced estimated hazard ratios for the effect of CRT on all-cause mortality and on the composite of first hospitalization for HF or death that suggested increasing benefit with increasing QRS duration, the 95% confidence bounds excluding 1.0 at ∼140 ms for each endpoint, suggesting a high probability of substantial benefit from CRT when QRS duration exceeds this value. Conclusion QRS duration is a powerful predictor of the effects of CRT on morbidity and mortality in patients with symptomatic HF and left ventricular systolic dysfunction who are in sinus rhythm. QRS morphology did not provide additional information about clinical response. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT00170300, NCT00271154, NCT00251251.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              AHA/ACCF/HRS recommendations for the standardization and interpretation of the electrocardiogram: part III: intraventricular conduction disturbances: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology; the American College of Cardiology Foundation; and the Heart Rhythm Society: endorsed by the International Society for Computerized Electrocardiology.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology
                Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol
                Wiley
                1082720X
                September 2018
                September 2018
                May 28 2018
                : 23
                : 5
                : e12563
                Affiliations
                [1 ]First Department of Cardiology, Interventional Electrocardiology and Hypertension, Medical College; Jagiellonian University; Cracow Poland
                [2 ]Department of Cardiology; H. Klimontowicz Specialistic Hospital; Gorlice Poland
                [3 ]Department of Statistics; Cracow University of Economics; Cracow Poland
                Article
                10.1111/anec.12563
                6931883
                29806716
                86043170-09a3-4efe-9a1f-75a5e49db798
                © 2018

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article