Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 19, 2026

Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
Cardiac resynchronization therapy: a review of CRT-D versus CRT-P
Giuseppe Stabile1, Assunta Iuliano, Pietro Turco
1Laboratorio di Elettrofisiologia, Clinica Mediterranea, Via Orazio 2, 80123 Napoli, Italy. gmrstabile@tin.it
Insights
Current guidelines suggest implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for heart failure. A pragmatic approach favors CRT, with ICDs added based on individual clinical judgment to balance benefits against risks like inappropriate shocks.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Devices
- Heart Failure Management
Background:
- Current guidelines recommend implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) for symptom improvement in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction and ventricular conduction abnormalities.
- Many patients may meet criteria for both ICD and CRT, raising questions about the added benefit of combined therapy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the pragmatic use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in heart failure management.
- To provide a simplified approach to device selection for patients with New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure.
Main Methods:
- Review of current evidence-based guidelines and clinical practice recommendations.
- Discussion of the potential benefits and risks of combined CRT and ICD therapy versus single-device therapy.
- Proposal of a pragmatic approach prioritizing CRT with individualized consideration for ICD implantation.
Main Results:
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is recommended for symptom improvement and survival in selected heart failure patients.
- The addition of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) to CRT may not provide additional survival benefits for all patients.
- The decision to add an ICD should be based on individual clinical judgment, weighing potential survival gains against risks such as inappropriate shocks.
Conclusions:
- A pragmatic approach suggests prioritizing CRT for symptomatic heart failure (NYHA class III-IV) to improve quality of life and survival.
- Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) may be added to CRT based on specific indications and clinical judgment.
- The potential for increased morbidity from inappropriate shocks must be carefully considered when contemplating combined CRT and ICD therapy.
Abstract:
Current evidence-based guidelines recommend an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in selected patients with impaired left ventricular function, and cardiac resynchronization therapy for improvement of symptoms and survival in selected patients with impaired left ventricular function and abnormal ventricular conduction. Many patients may be eligible for both treatments, but it does not necessarily follow that such patients would obtain additional benefit from the combined treatment over one treatment alone. A simple pragmatic approach would be to use resynchronisation therapy, in order to reduce symptoms and extend life in patients with New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, with the addition of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator left to clinical judgment on an individual basis when additional indications exist. When such an addition is contemplated the hypothesized incremental benefits in survival would need to be balanced by the possible increase in morbidity owing to, for example, inappropriate shocks.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Pulse rhythm
Conversely, an irregular pulse pattern is termed dysrhythmia, stemming from disruptions in cardiac muscle...
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Extracorporeal Removal of Drugs: Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy
Cardiomyopathy IV: Restrictive Cardiomyopathy
Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy

