QRS Duration and Shortening to Predict Clinical Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with End‐Stage Heart Failure
- 4 March 2004
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
- Vol. 27 (3) , 308-313
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.2004.00433.x
Abstract
Despite current selection criteria (NYHA Class III–IV, LVEF < 35%, QRS > 120 ms with LBBB), 30% of patients do not benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The use of QRS duration as selection criteria for CRT has not been evaluated systematically yet. Accordingly, the value of QRS duration at baseline (and reduction in QRS duration after CRT) to predict responders was studied. Patients were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months of CRT for NYHA Class, quality of life score, and 6-minute walk test. QRS duration was evaluated before, directly after implantation, and after 6 months of CRT. Sixty-one patients were included; 45 (74%) patients were classified as responders (improvement of NYHA Class, 6-minute walking distance and quality of life score) and 16 (26%) as nonresponders. QRS duration at baseline was similar between the two groups: 179 ± 30 ms versus 171 ± 32 ms, NS. Directly after implantation, QRS duration was reduced from 179 ± 30 ms to 150 ± 26 ms (P < 0.01) in responders; nonresponders did not exhibit this reduction (171 ± 32 ms vs 160 ± 26 ms, NS). After 6 months of CRT, QRS shortening was only observed in responders (from 179 ± 30 ms to 159 ± 25 ms, P < 0.01). ROC curve analysis showed that a reduction in QRS duration > 10 ms had a high sensitivity (73%) with low specificity (44%); conversely, a > 50 ms reduction in QRS duration was highly specific (88%) but not sensitive (18%) to predict response to CRT. No optimal cutoff value could be defined. QRS duration at baseline is not predictive for response to CRT; responders exhibit a significant reduction in QRS duration after CRT, but individual response varies highly, not allowing adequate selection of responders. (PACE 2004; 27:308–313)Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prediction of Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: The Selection of Candidates for CRT (SCART) StudyPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2006
- Cardiac Resynchronization in Chronic Heart FailureNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy using hemodynamically optimized pacing on left ventricular remodeling in patients with congestive heart failure and ventricular conduction disturbances11The PAcing THerapies in Congestive Heart Failure (PATH-CHF) study was supported by a grant from the Guidant Corporation (St. Paul, Minnesota). Drs. Pochet, Salo, Kramer and Spinelli have corporate appointments with Guidant Corp.Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2001
- What is cardiac resynchronization therapy?The American Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Effects of Multisite Biventricular Pacing in Patients with Heart Failure and Intraventricular Conduction DelayNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Why biventricular pacing might be of value in refractory heart failure?Heart, 2000
- Biventricular pacing in patients with congestive heart failure: two prospective randomized trialsThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1999
- The epidemiology of heart failure secondary to coronary artery diseaseCoronary Artery Disease, 1998
- Multisite Pacing for End‐Stage Heart Failure: Early ExperiencePacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1996
- Validity of the minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire as a measure of therapeutic response to enalapril or placeboThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1993