Premium
Baseline adverse electrical remodeling and the risk for ventricular arrhythmia in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Recipients (MADIT CRT)
Author(s) -
Biton Yitschak,
Ng Chee Yuan,
Xia Xiaojuan,
Baman Jayson R.,
Couderc JeanPhilippe,
Moss Arthur J.,
Kutyifa Valentina,
McNitt Scott,
Polonsky Bronislava,
Zareba Wojciech
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.193
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1540-8167
pISSN - 1045-3873
DOI - 10.1111/jce.13640
Subject(s) - medicine , cardiac resynchronization therapy , cardiology , ventricular remodeling , heart failure , adverse effect , ejection fraction
Abstract Introduction Adverse electrical remodeling (AER), represented here as the sum absolute QRST integral (SAI QRST), has previously been shown to be directly associated with the risk for ventricular arrhythmia (VA). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is known to reduce the risk for VA through various mechanisms, including reverse remodeling, and we aimed to evaluate the association between baseline AER and the risk for VA in CRT recipients. Methods and results The study population comprised 961 CRT‐D implanted patients from the MADIT CRT study. The relationship between SAI QRST, VA risk, and VA risk/death was evaluated as a continuous and as a categorical variable–tertiles (T1 ≤ 0.527, T2 0.528–0.766, T3 > 0.766). In a multivariable model, AER was inversely associated with the risk of VA. Each unit increase in SAI QRST was associated with 64% (P = 0.007) and 54% (P = 0.003) decrease in the risk of VA and VA/death, respectively. Patients with high SAI QRST (T3) and medium SAI QRST (T2) had 52% (P < 0.001) and 32% (P = 0.027) reduced risk for VA and 44% (P = 0.002) and 26% (P = 0.055) reduced risk for VA/death as compared with patients with low SAI QRST (T1), respectively. Conclusion In CRT implanted patients with mild heart failure, baseline AER was inversely associated with the risk for VA and VA/death; this is a finding that contradicts the relationship previously reported in non‐CRT implanted patients. We theorize that CRT may abate the process of AER; however, characterization of this mechanism requires further study.