Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026
Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking
Published on: August 29, 2018
CRT-D or CRT-P: When There Is a Dilemma and How to Solve It
Ageliki Laina1, Christos-Konstantinos Antoniou1, Dimitrios Tsiachris1
1First Department of Cardiology, "Hippokration" Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece.
Insights
Cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) is common, but its survival benefit over a pacemaker (CRT-P) is unclear. Patient selection is key to balancing CRT-D risks and benefits.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Devices
- Heart Failure Management
Background:
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in heart failure patients with electrical dyssynchrony.
- CRT is delivered via pacemaker (CRT-P) or defibrillator (CRT-D).
- CRT-D is frequently used, but its superiority over CRT-P lacks robust evidence.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare CRT-D and CRT-P efficacy and risks.
- To guide clinical decision-making in device selection.
- To review evidence on patient selection for CRT.
Main Methods:
- Comprehensive literature review.
- Analysis of existing randomized trials and observational data.
- Evaluation of risk-benefit profiles for CRT-D vs. CRT-P.
Main Results:
- No head-to-head trials directly compare CRT-D and CRT-P mortality benefits.
- CRT-D is implanted in 70-80% of cases despite limited evidence of superiority.
- Specific patient groups may not benefit from CRT-D's incremental risks and costs.
Conclusions:
- Device selection requires careful consideration of individual patient factors.
- Balancing CRT-D benefits against costs and risks is crucial.
- Further research is needed to clarify CRT-D's specific advantages over CRT-P.
Abstract:
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) represents a cornerstone in the management of patients with heart failure and electrical dyssynchrony, improving symptoms, reducing hospitalizations, and prolonging survival. CRT can be delivered via a pacemaker (CRT-P) or an ICD (CRT-D). Despite its widespread use, the mortality benefit of CRT-D over CRT-P remains uncertain, as no head-to-head randomized trials have been designed to directly compare the two modalities, making device selection a frequent clinical dilemma. In practice, CRT-D accounts for 70-80% of CRT implantations in developed countries, yet solid evidence demonstrating its superiority over CRT-P is lacking. Specific patient groups, including those with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, advanced age, multiple comorbidities, or limited life expectancy, may derive limited incremental benefit from CRT-D, which should be balanced against device costs and specific risks such as lead failure and inappropriate shocks. The present review aims to provide a comprehensive comparison between CRT-D and CRT-P, focusing on the existing body of evidence, criteria for patient selection, comparative clinical outcomes, and risk-benefit considerations for clinical decision-making.
More Related Videos
06:50Enabling High Grayscale Resolution Displays and Accurate Response Time Measurements on Conventional Computers
Published on: February 29, 2012
11:09RBDT: A Computerized Task System based in Transposition for the Continuous Analysis of Relational Behavior Dynamics in Humans
Published on: July 17, 2021
