Objective: To compare the rates of all-cause mortality in recipients of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices without (CRT-PM) versus with defibrillator (CRT-D).Methods: Between February 1999 and July 2004, 233 patients (mean age = 69 ± 8 years, 180 men) underwent implantation of CRT-PM or CRT-D devices. New York Heart Association (NYHA) heart failure functional class II was present in 11%, class III in 69%, and class IV in 20% of patients; mean left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) was 26.5 ± 6.5 %, 48% presented with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and 49% with ischemic heart disease. Cox multiple variable regression analysis was performed in search of predictors of death.Results: The clinical characteristics of the 117 CRT-PM and 116 CRT-D recipients were similar, except for LVEF (28.2 ± 6.2% vs 25.0 ± 6.5%, respectively; P < 0.001), and ischemic versus nonischemic etiology of heart failure (41% vs 56%, respectively P = 0.02). Over a mean follow-up of 58 ± 15 months, no significance difference in overall mortality rate was observed between the two study groups. Male sex, NYHA functional class IV, and atrial fibrillation at implant were significant predictors of death.Conclusions: There was no difference in long-term survival rate among patients with CRT-D versus CRT-PM, although CRT-D more effectively lowered the sudden death rate. Male sex, NYHA functional class IV, and atrial fibrillation predicted the worst prognosis.
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 02/2009; 32(s1):S141 - S145. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.02271.x · 1.25 Impact Factor