Influence of diabetes on cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without defibrillator in patients with advanced heart failure

ObjectivesWe performed a post hoc analysis to determine the influence of cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) or without a defibrillator (CRT-P) on outcomes among diabetic patients with advanced heart failure (HF).BackgroundIn patients with systolic HF, diabetes is an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality. No data are available on its impact on CRT-D or CRT-P in advanced HF.MethodsThe database of the Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing and Defibrillation in Heart Failure trial was examined to determine the influence of CRT (CRT-D and CRT-P) on outcomes among diabetic patients. All-cause mortality or hospitalization, all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization, and all-cause mortality were analyzed among diabetic patients (n = 622). A Cox proportional hazard model, adjusting for age, gender, New York Heart Association, ischemic status, body mass index, left ventricular ejection fraction, heart rate, QRS, left or right bundle branch block, blood pressure, comorbidities (renal failure, carotid artery disease, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, coronary artery bypass grafting, and atrial fibrillation), medications, and device (with or without defibrillator), was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and significance.ResultsThe overall outcome of diabetic patients was similar to that of nondiabetic patients in the optimal pharmacologic therapy arm. With CRT, diabetic patients experienced a substantial reduction in all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization (HR = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 62–0.97), all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.53–0.85), all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization (HR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.40–0.69), and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.45–0.99) compared with optimal pharmacologic therapy. Procedure-related complications and length of stay were identical in diabetic and nondiabetic patients.ConclusionIn diabetic patients with advanced HF, there is a substantial benefit from device therapy with significant improvement in all end points.     

Cost effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy in the Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing, and Defibrillation in Heart Failure (COMPANION) trial.

OBJECTIVES: The analysis goal was to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing, and Defibrillation in Heart Failure (COMPANION) trial patients who received cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via pacemaker (CRT-P) or pacemaker-defibrillator (CRT-D) in combination with optimal pharmacological therapy (OPT) relative to patients with OPT alone. BACKGROUND: In the COMPANION trial, CRT-P and CRT-D reduced the combined risk of all-cause mortality or first hospitalization among patients with advanced heart failure and intraventricular conduction delays, but the cost effectiveness of the therapy remains unknown. METHODS: In this analysis, intent-to-treat trial data were modeled to estimate the cost effectiveness of CRT-D and CRT-P relative to OPT over a base-case seven-year treatment episode. Exponential survival curves were derived from trial data and adjusted by quality-of-life trial results to yield quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). For the first two years, follow-up hospitalizations were based on trial data. The model assumed equalized hospitalization rates beyond two years. Initial implantation and follow-up hospitalization costs were estimated using Medicare data. RESULTS: Over two years, follow-up hospitalization costs were reduced by 29% for CRT-D and 37% for CRT-P. Extending the cost-effectiveness analysis to a seven-year base-case time period, the ICER for CRT-P was 19,600 dollars per QALY and the ICER for CRT-D was 43,000 dollars per QALY relative to OPT. CONCLUSIONS: For the COMPANION trial patients, the use of CRT-P and CRT-D was associated with a cost-effectiveness ratio below generally accepted benchmarks for therapeutic interventions of 50,000 dollars per QALY to 100,000 dollars per QALY. This suggests that the clinical benefits of CRT-P and CRT-D can be achieved at a reasonable cost.     

Clinical Effectiveness of CRT and ICD Therapy in Heart Failure Patients by Racial/Ethnic Classification : Insights From the IMPROVE HF Registry

Background

Clinical trials have demonstrated benefit for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF); yet, questions have been raised with regard to the benefit of device therapy for minorities.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical effectiveness of CRT and ICD therapies as a function of race/ethnicity in outpatients with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤35%).

Methods

Data from IMPROVE HF (Registry to Improve the Use of Evidence-Based Heart Failure Therapies in the Outpatient Setting) were analyzed by device status and race/ethnicity among guideline-eligible patients for mortality at 24 months. Multivariate Generalized Estimating Equations analyses were conducted, adjusting for patient and practice characteristics.

Results

The ICD/cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (CRT-D)–eligible cohort (n = 7,748) included 3,391 (44%) non-Hispanic white, 719 (9%) non-Hispanic black, and 3,638 (47%) other racial/ethnic minorities or race-not-documented patients. The cardiac resynchronization pacemaker (CRT-P)/CRT-D–eligible cohort (n = 1,188) included 596 (50%) non-Hispanic white, 99 (8%) non-Hispanic black, and 493 (41%) other/not-documented patients. There was clinical benefit associated with ICD/CRT-D therapy (adjusted odds ratio: 0.64, 95% confidence interval: 0.52 to 0.79, p = 0.0002 for 24-month mortality), which was of similar proportion in white, black, and other minority/not-documented patients (device–race/ethnicity interaction p = 0.7861). For CRT-P/CRT-D therapy, there were also associated mortality benefits (adjusted odds ratio: 0.55, 95% confidence interval: 0.33 to 0.91, p = 0.0222), and the device–race/ethnicity interaction was not significant (p = 0.5413).

Conclusions

The use of guideline-directed CRT and ICD therapy was associated with reduced 24-month mortality without significant interaction by racial/ethnic group. Device therapies should be offered to eligible heart failure patients, without modification based on race/ethnicity.     

Cardiac resynchronization pacing without defibrillator capability: is this a viable option?

Improved cardiac resynchronization by pacemakers (CRT-P) andimplantable defibrillators (CRT-D) benefits cardiac function,reduces heart failure (HF) admissions, and diminishes mortalityin patients with severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Interms of mortality benefit, current evidence suggests that CRT-Dmay be better than CRT-P alone when a broad range of HF patientsis considered. However, the differential benefit may be smallin certain patients. In individuals with severe and worseningHF due to systolic LV dysfunction, HF complications other thanventricular tachyarrhythmias contribute importantly to bothquality-of-life (QoL) and duration of survival; these patientsmay be served cost-effectively by CRT-P enhancing QoL. A clinicaltrial evaluating CRT-D vs. CRT-P in terms of QoL and survivalin such patients would assist physicians and payers to understandbetter the relative roles of CRT-P and CRT-D in the care ofthe sickest HF patients.     

单中心心脏再同步治疗相关并发症分析

目的回顾性总结单中心心脏再同步治疗（CRT）相关并发症概况为临床对CRT患者的管理提供相关经验。 方法本研究为回顾性研究,纳入2009年6月至2021年6月在新疆医科大学第一附属医院心血管内科植入CRT的心力衰竭（心衰）患者,按照植入装置类型分为心脏再同步治疗除颤器（CRT-D）组和心脏再同步治疗起搏器（CRT-P）组,分析患者术中、术后发生左心室导线植入失败、膈肌刺激、冠状静脉系统损伤等相关并发症的情况及原因。 结果共纳入469例患者,其中男359例（359/469,76.55%）,年龄（62.31±11.69）岁,术前左心室射血分数为34.76%±7.96%,术前QRS时限为（161.82±30.57）ms。左心室导线植入成功率为95.1%（446/499）。术中膈肌刺激2例（0.43%）;急性左心衰竭3例（6.40%）;冠状静脉夹层15例（3.19%）;囊袋血肿4例（0.85%）;导线脱位10例（2.13%）,其中急性脱位2例（20%）、亚急性脱位4例（40%）、迟发性脱位4例（40%）。 结论CRT术中发生相关并发症的风险较高,同时也要警惕和排除发生相关术后并发症的可能。     

Trends of Sex Differences in Outcomes of Cardiac Electronic Device Implantations in the United States

BackgroundThe disparity in outcomes of cardiac electronic device implantations between sexes has been previously demonstrated in device-specific cohorts (eg, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators [ICDs]). However, it is unclear whether sex differences are present with all types of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and, if so, what the trends of such differences have been in recent years.MethodsWith the use of the National Inpatient Sample, all hospitalizations from 2004 to 2014 for de novo implantation of permanent pacemakers, cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without a defibrillator, and ICDs were analyzed to examine the association between sex and in-hospital acute complications of CIED implantation.ResultsOut of 2,815,613 hospitalizations for de novo CIED implantation, 41.9% were performed on women. Women were associated with increased adjusted odds (95% confidence interval) of adverse procedural complications (major adverse cardiovascular complications: 1.17 [1.16-1.19]; bleeding: 1.13 [1.12-1.15],-thoracic: 1.42 [1.40-1.44]; cardiac: 1.44 [1.38-1.50]), whereas the adjusted odds of in-hospital all-cause mortality compared with men was 0.96 (0.94-1.00). The odds of adverse complications in the overall CIED cohort were persistently raised in women throughout the study period, whereas similar odds of all-cause mortality across the sexes were observed throughout the study period.ConclusionIn a national cohort of CIED implantations we demonstrate that women are at an overall higher risk of procedure-related adverse events compared with men, but not at increased risk of all-cause mortality. Further studies are required to identify procedural techniques that would improve outcomes among women undergoing such procedures.     

Incidence and predictors of super-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

ObjectivesCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has significantly improved management of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A significant number of patients have a dramatic response and have been termed “super-responders”. The characteristics of this subset of patients in Indian and Asian population have not been well studied. In this study, we sought to assess the prevalence and clinical characteristics of this cohort of patients.MethodsThis was a retrospective study involving patients undergoing CRT. Changes in ejection fraction and LVESV at the end of one year of follow-up following device implantation were assessed, and patients were stratified into non-responders, responders, and super-responders. Responders had a 15–29% decrease in LVESV while super-responders had a >30% decrease in LVESV.ResultsOf the 74 patients who had undergone CRT-P/CRT-D implantation, 16 patients did not have echocardiograms at the end of one year of follow-up and were excluded from the analysis. Thus, 58 patients were enrolled for analysis. We identified 16 patients (27.6%) to be super-responders, 26 patients (44.8%) to be responders, and 16 patients (27.6%) to be non-responders. Factors associated with a super-response were a diagnosis of dilated cardiomyopathy as against ischemic cardiomyopathy (93.7% vs 6.3%; p – 0.01), prior right ventricular (RV) apical pacing (25% vs 2.4%; p – 0.02) and absence of a prior history of myocardial infarction (MI) (0% vs 33.3%; p – 0.02).ConclusionIn our study, 27.6% of patients were super-responders, and a diagnosis of dilated cardiomyopathy, absence of a prior history of MI and prior RV apical pacing predicted a super-response to CRT.     

Device Therapies: New Indications and Future Directions

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICDs), cardiac resynchronization (CRT) and combination (CRT-D) therapy have be-come an integral part of the management of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). ICDs treat ventricular arrhythmia and CRTs improve left ventricular systolic function by resynchronizing ventricular contraction. De-vice therapies (ICD, CRT-D), have been shown to reduce all-cause mortality, including sudden cardiac death. Hospitaliza-tions are reduced with CRT and CRT-D therapy. Major device related complications include device infection, inappropriate shocks, lead malfunction and complications related to extraction of devices. Improvements in device design and implantation have included progressive miniaturization and increasing battery life of the device, optimization of response to CRT, and minimizing inappropriate device therapy. Additionally, better definition of the population with the greatest benefit is an area of active research.     

A survey of cardiac implantable electronic device implantation in India: By Indian Society of Electrocardiology and Indian Heart Rhythm Society

BackgroundThere is limited data regarding the demographics and type of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) in India.AimThe aim of this survey was to define trends in CIED implants, which included permanent pacemakers (PM), intracardiac defibrillators (ICD), and cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers and defibrillators (CRT-P/D) devices in India.MethodsThe survey was the initiative of the Indian Society of Electrocardiology and the Indian Heart Rhythm Society. The type of CIED used, their indications, demographic characteristics, clinical status and co-morbidities were collected using a survey form over a period of 1 year.Results2117 forms were analysed from 136 centers. PM for bradyarrhythmic indication constituted 80% of the devices implanted with ICD's and CRT-P/D forming approximately 10% each. The most common indication for PM implantation was complete atrio-ventricular block (76%). Single chamber (VVI) pacemakers formed 54% of implants, majority in males (64%). The indication for ICD implantation was almost equal for primary and secondary prevention. A single chamber ICD was most commonly implanted (65%). Coronary artery disease was the etiology in 58.5% of patients with ICD implants. CRT pacemakers were implanted mostly in patients with NYHA III/IV (82%), left ventricular ejection fraction <0.35 (88%) with CRT-P being most commonly used (57%).ConclusionA large proportion of CIED implants in India are PM for bradyarrhythmic indications, predominantly AV block. ICD's are implanted almost equally for primary and secondary prophylaxis. Most CRT devices are implanted for NYHA Class III. There is a male predominance for implantation of CIED.     

Epicardial CRT-P- and S-ICD Implantation in a Young Patient with Persistent Left Superior Vena Cava

Persistent left superior vena cava is known to be a challenging anatomic abnormality for transvenous cardiac device implantation. In the a case of a young man presenting with dilative cardiomyopathy with severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and second-degree atrioventricular block (AV block), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with defibrillator (CRT-D) implantation was indicated. A transvenous approach was attempted, but placement of the right ventricular lead was not successful due to anatomic abnormalities. Therefore, epicardial CRT leads were implanted via a left mini-thoracotomy. For primary prevention of sudden death, the patient was also fitted with an additional subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD). Any cross-talk between the devices was ruled out both intraoperatively and by ergometry prior to discharge. The combination of epicardial CRT-P with S?ICD implantation might be a safe and effective alternative in patients with cardiac anatomic abnormalities.     

Cardiac resynchronization therapy to prevent life-threatening arrhythmias in patients with congestive heart failure

Various clinical data demonstrate that cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) provides a favorable structural as well as electrical remodeling. The CArdiac Resynchronization–Heart Failure study, which tested the pure effect of CRT (using CRT devices without the capability of defibrillation) clearly showed a significant reduction in the total mortality by partly preventing sudden cardiac death. The antiarrhythmic effects of CRT are explained, at least in part, by ionic and genetic modulation of ventricular myocytes. It has been revealed in animal experiments to mimic disorganized ventricular contraction that CRT reverses down-regulation of certain K⁺ channels and abnormal Ca²⁺ homeostasis in the failing heart. However, CRT can be proarrhythmic in some particular cases especially in the early phase of this therapy. According to our study, proarrhythmic effects after CRT can be observed in approximately 10% of patients. The relatively high incidence of the proarrhythmic effects of CRT may promote a trend toward selecting CRT-D rather than CRT-P.     

Cardiac Device Implantation in the United States from 1997 through 2004: A Population-based Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Use of cardiac devices has been increasing rapidly along with concerns over their safety and effectiveness. This study used hospital administrative data to assess cardiac device implantations in the United States, selected perioperative outcomes, and associated patient and hospital characteristics.

METHODS

We screened hospital discharge abstracts from the 1997–2004 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Samples. Patients who underwent implantation of pacemaker (PM), automatic cardioverter/defibrillator (AICD), or cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker (CRT-P) or defibrillator (CRT-D) were identified using ICD-9-CM procedure codes. Outcomes ascertainable from these data and associated hospital and patient characteristics were analyzed.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Approximately 67,000 AICDs and 178,000 PMs were implanted in 2004 in the United States, increasing 60% and 19%, respectively, since 1997. After FDA approval in 2001, CRT-D and CRT-P reached 33,000 and 7,000 units per year in the United States in 2004. About 70% of the patients were aged 65 years or older, and more than 75% of the patients had 1 or more comorbid diseases. There were substantial decreases in length of stay, but marked increases in charges, for example, the length of stay of AICD implantations halved (from 9.9 days in 1997 to 5.2 days in 2004), whereas charges nearly doubled (from $66,000 in 1997 to $117,000 in 2004). Rates of in-hospital mortality and complications fluctuated slightly during the period. Overall, adverse outcomes were associated with advanced age, comorbid conditions, and emergency admissions, and there was no consistent volume–outcome relationship across different outcome measures and patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The numbers of cardiac device implantations in the United States steadily increased from 1997 to 2004, with substantial reductions in length of stay and increases in charges. Rates of in-hospital mortality and complications changed slightly over the years and were associated primarily with patient frailty.

     

左室四极起搏导线在心脏再同步治疗中的应用

目的初步评估左心室四极导线的安全性和有效性。方法入选符合心脏再同步治疗（CRT）适应证的患者,植入应用左心室四极导线的心脏再同步除颤器（CRT—D）。评估其安全性和急性期疗效。结果2例患者均通过静脉途径成功植入CRT—D装置,仅1例在头端（第1极）起搏测试时有膈神经刺激,未出现其他手术并发症。程控发现,优化的起搏向量下,2例患者的QRS时限和心脏同步性均最佳,左室射血分数改善。结论初步的应用结果表明,左心室四极导线在减少相关并发症的同时,提高CRT急性期疗效。     

What is the level of evidence for combined cardiac resynchronization and defibrillation therapy in heart failure?

The recently published ESC Guidelines for cardiac pacing andcardiac resynchronization therapy¹ (CRT-P) are comprehensiveand very welcome. We would like to comment on the strength ofevidence given for combined cardiac resynchronization and defibrillationtherapy (CRT-D). Section     

Intermediate-term mortality and incidence of ICD therapy in octogenarians after cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background Clinical outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy （CRT） in patients over the age of 80 have not been well de-scribed.MethodsWe retrospectively identified 96 consecutive patients≥ 80 years old who underwent an initial implant or an upgrade to CRT, with or without defibrillator （CRT-Dvs. CRT-P）, at our institution between January 2003 and July 2008. The control cohort consisted of 177 randomly selected patients 〈 80 years old undergoing CRT implant during the same time period. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality at 36 months, assessed by Kaplan-Meier time to first event curves.Results In the octogenarian cohort, mean age at CRT implant was 83.1 ± 2.9 yearsvs. 60.1 ± 8.8 years among controls （P 〈 0.001）. Across both groups, 70% were male, mean left ventricular ejection fraction （LVEF） was 24.8% ± 14.1% and QRS duration was 154 ± 24.8 ms, without significant differences between groups. Octo-genarians were more likely to have ischemic cardiomyopathy （74%vs. 37%,P 〈 0.001） and more likely to undergo upgrade to CRT instead of an initial implant （42%vs. 19%,P 〈 0.001）. The rate of appropriate defibrillator shocks was lower among octogenarians （14%vs. 27%,P = 0.02） whereas the rate of inappropriate shocks was similar （3%vs. 6%,P = 0.55）. At 36 months, there was no significant difference in the rate of all-cause mortality between octogenarians （11%） and controls （8%,P = 0.381）.ConclusionAppropriately selected octogenarians who are candidates for CRT have similar intermediate-term mortality compared to younger patients receiving CRT.     

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy as a cause of the electrical storm

We report a case of young patient with dilated cardiomyopathy and implanted cardioverter-defibrillator in which resynchronisation therapy (CRT-D) induced an electrical storm. One month after implantation of a cardiac resynchronisation pacemaker (CRT-P) the patient suffered from ventricular tachycardia with poor haemodynamic status and was treated by implantation of a CRT-D with a Y adaptor. After replacement of the CRT-D due to Y adaptor damage (new device without a Y adaptor) we observed an electrical storm during ventricular pacing (biventricular, right and left ventricular pacing respectively). Changing pacing mode from DDDR to AAIR resolved ventricular tachycardias in that patient.     

Cardiac Resynchronization Defibrillator Therapy for Nonspecific Intraventricular Conduction Delay Versus Right Bundle Branch Block

BackgroundThe benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB) conduction abnormality have not been fully explored.ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate clinical outcomes among Medicare-aged patients with nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (NICD) versus right bundle branch block (RBBB) in patients eligible for implantation with a CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D).MethodsUsing the National Cardiovascular Data Registry implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) registry data between 2010 and 2013, the authors compared outcomes in CRT-eligible patients implanted with CRT-D versus ICD-only therapy among patients with NICD and RBBB. Also, among all CRT-D–implanted patients, the authors compared outcomes in those with NICD versus RBBB. Survival curves and multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were used to assess outcomes including hospitalization and death.ResultsIn 11,505 non-LBBB CRT-eligible patients, after multivariable adjustment, among patients with RBBB, CRT-D was not associated with better outcomes, compared with ICD alone, regardless of QRS duration. Among patients with NICD and a QRS ≥150 ms, CRT-D was associated with decreased mortality at 3 years compared with ICD alone (HR: 0.602; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.416 to 0.871; p = 0.0071). Among 5,954 CRT-D–implanted patients, after multivariable adjustment NICD compared with RBBB was associated with lower mortality at 3 years in those with a QRS duration of ≥150 ms (HR: 0.757; 95% CI: 0.625 to 0.917; p = 0.0044).ConclusionsAmong non-LBBB CRT-D–eligible patients, CRT-D implantation was associated with better outcomes compared with ICD alone specifically in NICD patients with a QRS duration of ≥150 ms. Careful patient selection should be considered for CRT-D implantation in patients with non-LBBB conduction.     

Endothelial Dysfunction is a Marker of Systemic Response to the Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Heart Failure

BackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) induces a significant improvement in patients with heart failure (HF), who are often characterized by the presence of endothelial dysfunction (ED) with impaired flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD). We aimed to study the ED in patients with HF candidates to CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D).Methods and ResultsWe studied 57 consecutive patients affected by HF and undergoing CRT-D. At the baseline we recorded a high prevalence of ED (64.9%) with impaired FMD (4.1 ± 3.8%). After 12 months of CRT, we reported a marked increase of the mean FMD (8.8 ± 4.8% vs 4.1 ± 3.8%; P < .05) along with significant improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV), New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT); 42 patients (73.7%) were classified as responders according to standard criteria. FMD was related to LVEF (r = 0.169; P < .05), LVESV (r = ?0.169; P < .05), NYHA functional class (r = ?0.27; P < .051), and 6MWT (r = 0.360; P < .01).ConclusionsED is not an independent predictor of CRT response, but it is able to intercept the systemic effects of CRT and is an affordable marker of response to CRT, especially in patients unable to perform the 6MWT.     

CRT-D在慢性心力衰竭患者的临床应用

目的 心脏再同步治疗（CRT）可以显著改善慢性心力衰竭（CHF）患者心功能,而植入型心律转复除颤器（ICD）可以有效预防心脏性猝死.具有CRT和ICD功能的CRT-D已开始应用于临床.本文初步总结CRT-D的临床应用.方法 4例药物治疗无效的CHF患者,合并左束支阻滞、左心室舒张末内径增大,而且既往有室性心动过速病史.其中扩张性心肌病3例,缺血性心肌病1例.接受组织多普勒检查证实存在心脏运动不同步后,接受了CRT-D治疗.结果 4例患者均成功植入CRT-D.左心室起搏导线植入到心脏后静脉3例,心脏侧后静脉1例.术中测试除颤能量≤20 J,无并发症发生.术后1周左心室射血分数从0.34增加至0.42。结论 CRT-D植入技术难度大,风险高,但其安全性肯定.鉴于其显著疗效,建议同时满足CRT和ICD适应证的患者应该接受CRT-D治疗.