Search

Aims Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is effective in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and dyssynchrony but is underutilized. In a cohort study, we identified clinical, organizational, and level of care factors linked to CRT implantation. Methods and results We included HFrEF patients fulfilling study criteria in the ESC-HF-Long Term Registry (ESC-HF-LT, n = 1031), the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) (n = 5008), and the ESC-CRT Survey II (n = 11 088). In ESC-HF-LT, 36% had a CRT indication of which 47% had CRT, 53% had indication but no CRT, and the remaining 54% had no indication and no CRT. In SwedeHF, these percentages were 30, 25, 75, and 70%. Median age of patients with CRT indication and CRT present vs. absent was 68 vs. 65 years with 24% vs. 22% women in ESC-HF-LT, 76 vs. 74 years with 26% vs. 26% women in SwedeHF, and 70 years with 24% women in CRT Survey II (all had CRT). For ESC-HF-LT, independent predictors of having CRT were guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), atrial fibrillation (AF), prior HF hospitalization, and NYHA class. For SwedeHF, they were GDMT, age, AF, previous myocardial infarction, lower NYHA class, enrolment at university hospital, and follow-up at HF centre/Hospital. In SwedeHF, above median income and higher education level were also independently associated with having CRT. In the ESC-CRT Survey II (n = 11 088), all patients received CRT but with differences in the clinical characteristics between countries. Conclusion CRT was used in a minority of eligible patients and more used in ESC-HF-LT than in SwedeHF.

AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and electrical dyssynchrony. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations indicating optimal patient selection for CRT implantation in both the 2013 European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the 2016 Heart Failure Association (HFA) Guidelines. We assessed the adherence to guidelines and identified factors associated with guideline adherence. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 2016, the HFA and EHRA conducted the CRT Survey II in 42 ESC countries. The data collected were sufficient to evaluate adherence to guidelines in 8021 patients. Of these, 67% had a Class I guideline indication for CRT implantation, which was significantly correlated with female gender (1.70, P < 0.0001), age <75 years (1.55, P < 0.0001), non-ischaemic HF aetiology (1.22, P < 0.0001), and elective admission (1.87, P < 0.0001). A further 26% of implants had a Class IIa indication, 5% IIb and only 2% a contraindication to CRT-a Class III indication. Patients implanted under Level IIa indications were much more likely to have more comorbidities than patients implanted under Level I indications. However, there were large variations in guideline adherence between ESC countries. CONCLUSION: Implanters in ESC member states demonstrate a high degree of adherence to ESC guidelines with 98% of implants having a documented Class I, IIa or IIb indication. Cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation without a Class I indication was more likely in men, patients age ≥75 years, with HF of ischaemic origin and in patients admitted to hospital acutely.

This subanalysis of the Euro-CRT survey II specifically focus on Belgian practice for CRT implantation. It explores Belgian adherence with the guidelines but also benchmark CRT practice in Belgium against the other European countries. Overall, Belgian management of CRT implantation is performed with great agreement with guidelines. This report could be used to provide guidance for both practical and economical approaches.

Objectives: To compare the contemporary practice of CRT implantation in Scandinavia and Europe. Design: We used data from The European CRT Survey II to highlight similarities and differences in the practice of CRT implantation between Europe (EUR) and Scandinavia (SCAND) and between the Scandinavian countries Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Implant data from the national pacemaker registries were used to calculate coverage. Results: The coverage was 24% in SCAND and 11% in EUR. SCAND patients were more often referred from another centre and follow-up was less often to be performed at the operating centre. Telemonitoring was more commonly used. More patients had AV-block or pacemaker dependency/expected high RV pacing percentage as indication for CRT. A CRT-P was more commonly used, and ischaemic aetiology was slightly less common. Echocardiography was more often used to determine LVEF, as well as occlusive venography and placing the RV lead first. In DK implanters tended to choose a septal RV position. Quadripolar leads were more often and a test shock less often used. The paced QRS duration was slightly longer and the narrowing of QRS with CRT more limited. Procedure times and preoperative LVEF were similar. Conclusions: In Scandinavia AV-conduction disturbance and/or a ventricular pacing indication was a more common indication for CRT, suggesting adaptation of the most recent guidelines ahead of their publication. A test shock was almost never performed, in agreement with recent scientific evidence. CRT-P was more often used, the procedures seem more centralized and quadripolar leads were preferred.

AIM: Between October 2015 and December 2016, 11,088 patients from 42 countries having cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) devices implanted were included in the CRT II Survey. We compared the characteristics of Swiss CRT recipients with the overall European population. METHODS: Demographic and procedural data from seven Swiss centres recruiting all consecutive patients undergoing either de-novo CRT implantation or an upgrade to a CRT system were collected and compared with the European population. RESULTS: A total of 320 Swiss patients (24.4% female, mean age 71.0 ± 10.2 years, 47% ischaemic cardiomyopathy) were enrolled, which amounts to 38% of all CRT implantations in Switzerland during this period. Of the patients enrolled, 38% had atrial fibrillation, 27% second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, and 68% complete left bundle-branch block. Swiss patients had significantly less often the classical indication of heart failure with a wide QRS complex (40 vs 61%; odds ratio [OR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.55; p <0.001). Compared with the European population, Swiss patients were significantly older (71 vs 68.5 years, p <0.001), less symptomatic from heart failure and had more chronic kidney disease. Swiss patients significantly more often received a CRT-pacemaker (37 vs 30%; OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.09-1.73; p = 0.007) and quadripolar left ventricular leads (69 vs 57%; OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.32-2.13; p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with European CRT recipients, Swiss CRT patients are older, less symptomatic and suffer more often from comorbidities. Although two thirds of the implantations were CRT-defibrillator systems, Swiss patients more often received CRT-pacemaker systems than their European counterparts.

The Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) Survey II is a 6 months snapshot survey initiated by two ESC Associations, the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Failure Association, which is designed to describe clinical practice regarding implantation of CRT devices in a broad sample of hospitals in 47 ESC member countries. The large volume of clinical and demographic data collected should reflect current patient selection, implantation, and follow-up practice and provide information relevant for assessing healthcare resource utilization in connection with CRT. The findings of this survey should permit representative benchmarking both nationally and internationally across Europe