Cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without defibrillator: experience from a high-volume Belgian implantation centre

Abstract

Objective Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an important treatment modality for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and ventricular conduction delay. Considering limited health care budgets in an aging population, adding a defibrillator function to CRT remains a matter of debate. Our aim was to describe the experience of a high-volume Belgian implantation centre with CRT with/without defibrillator (CRT-D/P). Methods and results Consecutive CRT patients (n=221), implanted between October 2008 and April 2011 in Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg (Genk), were reviewed. From 209 primo-implantations, 74 CRT-D and 98 CRT-P patients with complete follow-up inside the centre, were analysed. Despite differences in baseline characteristics, both groups demonstrated similar reverse left ventricular remodelling, improvement in New York Heart Association functional class and maximal aerobic capacity. During mean follow-up of 18 +/- 9 months, 21 patients died and 83 spent a total of 1200 days in hospital. Annual mortality was 8% and equal among the groups. The mode of death differed between CRT-D (predominantly pump failure) and CRT-P patients (pump failure, comorbidity and sudden death).The yearly population attributable risk of malignant ventricular arrhythmia was 8.16% in CRT-D and 1.38% in CRT-P patients. Conclusions With current guidelines applied to the Belgian reimbursement criteria and at physicians' discretion, patient selection for CRT-D/CRT-P was appropriate, with similar reverse remodelling, functional capacity improvement and good clinical outcome in both groups. High-risk patients for malignant ventricular arrhythmia were more likely to receive CRT-D, although the yearly attributable risk remained 1.38% in CRT-P patients.