Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy by New York Heart Association Class: A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis
Nishkala Shivakumar1, Daniel J Friedman2,3, Marat Fudim2,3
1Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Insights
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) benefits patients with heart failure (HF). This meta-analysis found CRT improved outcomes similarly for both New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III and IV patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Devices
- Clinical Trials
Background:
- Severe heart failure (HF) symptoms limit data on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) benefits.
- Investigating CRT's relative effects in ambulatory NYHA class IV versus class III patients is crucial.
Conclusions:
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) demonstrates a significant benefit in reducing heart failure hospitalizations and all-cause mortality.
- The study found no significant difference in CRT's effectiveness between patients classified as NYHA functional class III and IV.
- CRT is a valuable treatment option for severe heart failure patients, irrespective of NYHA functional class III or IV.
Abstract:
Data on the benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with severe heart failure (HF) symptoms are limited. We investigated the relative effects of CRT in patients with ambulatory NYHA IV vs. III functional class at the time of device implantation. In this meta-analysis, we pooled patient-level data from the MIRACLE, MIRACLE-ICD, and COMPANION trials. Outcomes evaluated were time to the composite endpoint of first HF hospitalization (HFH) or all-cause mortality and time to all-cause mortality alone. The association between CRT and outcomes was evaluated using a Bayesian Hierarchical Weibull survival regression model. We assessed if this association differs between NYHA III and IV groups by adding an interaction term between CRT and NYHA class as a random effect. A sensitivity analysis was performed by including data from the RAFT trial. Our pooled analysis included 2309 patients. Overall, CRT was associated with a longer time to HFH or all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.79, 95%CI 0.64 - 0.99, p = 0.044), with a similar association with time to all-cause mortality (aHR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 - 1.03, p = 0.083). Associations of CRT with outcomes were not significantly different for those in NYHA III and IV classes (ratio of aHR 0.72, 95% CI 0.30 - 1.27, p = 0.23 for HFH/mortality; ratio of aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.35 - 1.34, p = 0.27 for all-cause mortality alone). The sensitivity analysis, including RAFT data, did not show a significant relative CRT benefit between NYHA III and IV classes. Overall, there was no significant difference in the association of CRT with either outcome for patients in NYHA functional class III compared with functional class IV.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Heart Failure IV: Classification and Diagnostic Evaluation
Heart Failure Drugs: Inhibitors of Renin-Angiotensin System
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy


