CARDIAC RESYNCHRONIZATION THERAPY WITH OR WITHOUT AN IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATOR IN DIFFERENT GROUPS OF HEART FAILURE PATIENTS

Abstract

Aim. Patients with heart failure have poor prognosis and mortality rate is between 15–60% per year. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy have been shown to improve survival, decrease hospital readmissions and mortality, and improve functional status and quality of life in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Aim of the study was to examine the effects of different CRT devices in carefully selected heart failure patients during 1 year.Material and methods. We included 98 heart failure patients. First group (n=60) received CRT-P, while in second group (n=38) were patients with CRT-D pacemaker (with an additional cardioverter-defibrillator option).Results. Data gathered in our the study showed that both CRT-P and CRT-D in adequately selected heart failure patients improve different clinical parameters: symptoms, echocardiographic parameters, decrease QRS duration, increase 6 min walk test distance, decrease mortality rate.Conclusion. Patients with both CRT-P and CRT-D showed improvement in heart failure symptoms and CRT had significant influence on disease prognosis during 1 year of follow up. Nevertheless we do not have the perfect criteria for selection of patients and their follow up after the device implantation. In patients with the rhythm disturbances CRT-D option is the right choice only if the patient has the indications for resynchronization therapy as well. This choice however depends on clinical judgment of the operator more than on strict protocols and guidelines which are necessary but we need more clinical trials to support current hypothesis.

Keywords

• chronic heart failure
• pacemaker
• prognosis