Pacemaker Versus Defibrillator Therapy in Patients Eligible for Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy: Evidence from the German Device Registry
<b>Background</b>: According to current guidelines, cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) is recommended in patients with significantly impaired left ventricular systolic function and left bundle branch block. However, the decision between pacemaker (CRT-P) and defibrillator (CRT-D) in patients eligible for CRT remains a matter of debate. Register data have shown a higher all-cause mortality in CRT-P in comparison to patients with a CRT-D. Here, we investigated clinical determinants of the selection of CRT-P vs. CRT-D and clinical outcome in large registry data from a multi-centre 'real-life' registry on patients with CRT defibrillator or pacemaker therapy. <b>Methods</b>: The German Device Registry (DEVICE) is a nationwide, prospective registry with one-year follow-up investigating 5451 patients receiving device implantations in 50 German centres. The present analysis of DEVICE focused on all patients from the register receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. <b>Results</b>: Out of 1603 patients receiving cardiac resynchronisation therapy, 1536 (95.8%) received a CRT defibrillator system and 67 (4.2%) a CRT pacemaker system. Patients in the CRT-P group had a significantly better left ventricular systolic function compared to the CRT-D group (median 35% vs. 25%), and significantly less often had a history of myocardial infarction (9.0% vs. 25.2%). A preexisting pacemaker and a history of stroke/peripheral embolism were identified as determinants for the selection of CRT-P vs. CRT-D. Overall mortality after one-year follow-up was 8.0%. Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy receiving CRT-P therapy had a higher one-year mortality than patients receiving CRT-D (21.2% vs. 8.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.020). On the other hand, patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy did not display differences between these two treatment groups (CRT-P 8.1%, CRT-D 6.6%, <i>p</i> = 0.72). <b>Conclusions</b>: Data from the German device registry show that most patients receiving cardiac synchronization therapy have an implanted CRT-D system. In comparison to patients with CRT-D, those with CRT-P more often had a non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and a preexisting pacemaker system. The outcomes between these two treatment groups were different as regards ischemic cardiomyopathy only.
Authors
- Lars Eckardt (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3735-8503)
- Philipp S. Lange (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7026-9609)
- Gerrit Frommeyer (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1431-9886)
- Sebastian Reif (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9568-9677)
- Matthias Hochadel (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0499-704X)
- Jochen Senges (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3547-2126)
- Johannes Brachmann (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9221-9856)
- Patrick Lugenbiel (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3886-0930)
- Thomas Kleemann (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4362-3713)
Institutions
- Heidelberg University (DE)
- University of Münster (DE)
- University Hospital Heidelberg (DE)
- München Klinik Bogenhausen (DE)
- Stiftung Institut für Herzinfarktforschung (DE)
- Klinikum Coburg (DE)
- Klinikum Ludwigshafen (DE)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Published
- 2025-02-10
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14041137
- Primary Topic
- Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster