Results of the Predictors of Response to CRT (PROSPECT) trial

Eugene S Chung1, Angel R Leon, Luigi Tavazzi

  • 1Lindner Clinical Trial Center, Cincinnati, OH 45219, USA. chunge@ohioheart.org

Circulation
|May 7, 2008
PubMed

Insights

Echocardiographic measures of mechanical dyssynchrony showed limited ability to predict patient response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in a large multicenter study. Further research is needed to reduce variability and improve the predictive power of these parameters.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiology
  • Medical Imaging
  • Heart Failure Management

Background:

  • Single-center studies suggested echocardiographic parameters of mechanical dyssynchrony could improve patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).
  • The Predictors of Response to CRT (PROSPECT) study was designed to prospectively evaluate these parameters in a multicenter setting.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To test the performance of echocardiographic parameters of mechanical dyssynchrony in predicting CRT response.
  • To assess the utility of these parameters beyond current patient selection guidelines.

Main Methods:

  • A prospective, multicenter trial enrolled 498 patients with standard CRT indications.
  • Twelve echocardiographic dyssynchrony parameters were evaluated using conventional and tissue Doppler methods.
  • Patient response to CRT was defined by improvements in clinical composite score and left ventricular end-systolic volume at 6 months.

Main Results:

  • Clinical composite score improved in 69% of patients, and left ventricular end-systolic volume decreased by >= 15% in 56%.
  • The predictive ability of the 12 echocardiographic parameters varied widely, with low sensitivity and specificity.
  • The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve for predicting CRT response was <= 0.62 for all parameters, indicating modest predictive power.

Conclusions:

  • No single echocardiographic measure of dyssynchrony may be recommended to improve CRT patient selection beyond current guidelines.
  • Significant variability in parameter analysis was observed, despite training and central review.
  • Reducing technical and interpretative variability is crucial to enhance the predictive value of echocardiographic parameters in clinical practice.
Abstract