Impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices: A systematic review and
Miloud Cherbi1, Paul Gautier1, Raphael Martins2
1Cardiology Department, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
Insights
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) offers no survival or hemodynamic benefits for patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Further research is needed to determine CRT
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Devices
- Clinical Outcomes Research
Background:
- Many patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) also receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).
- The clinical and hemodynamic impact of CRT in LVAD patients is not well understood.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis evaluating the impact of CRT on survival and clinical outcomes in patients with LVADs.
- To assess the effect of CRT on key hemodynamic parameters in LVAD recipients.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases up to April 30, 2025.
- Primary outcome: all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes: ventricular arrhythmias, device shocks, and various hemodynamic measures.
- Included 13 studies with a total of 3,665 patients.
Main Results:
- CRT did not significantly improve survival in LVAD patients across various comparisons (CRT-D vs. ICD, CRT on vs. off, CRT vs. no device).
- No significant differences were observed in ventricular arrhythmias or device shock rates with CRT.
- Biventricular pacing showed no hemodynamic advantages compared to right ventricular pacing or intrinsic rhythm.
Conclusions:
- This meta-analysis indicates that CRT is not associated with improved survival or hemodynamic function in LVAD recipients.
- Further randomized controlled trials are recommended to clarify CRT's role and identify optimal patient selection criteria for LVAD patients.
Background:
Many patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, the impact of CRT on their clinical and hemodynamic outcomes remains unclear.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate CRT's impact on survival in LVAD patients. We searched PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception through April 30, 2025, for studies reporting outcomes in LVAD patients with CRT. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in patients with versus without CRT. Secondary clinical outcomes included ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and shocks delivered. Hemodynamic outcomes included heart rate, right atrial pressure, mean pulmonary artery pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, thermodilution cardiac output, pulmonary artery saturation, right ventricular stroke work index, and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter.
Results:
Thirteen studies, including 3,665 patients, were analyzed. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) did not demonstrate any significant survival benefit, whether comparing CRT-D versus ICD (OR 1.12 [0.85-1.48]), CRT on versus CRT off (OR 1.48 [0.87-2.53]), CRT versus no device (OR 0.99 [0.61-1.59]), or CRT versus no device or ICD (OR 1.00 [0.16-6.31]). Similarly, none of the tested comparisons showed significant differences in VAs incidence or shock rates. Biventricular pacing demonstrated no advantage for any hemodynamic outcomes, whether compared to right ventricular pacing or intrinsic rhythm.
Conclusion:
In this meta-analysis, CRT was not associated with overall survival benefit in LVAD recipients, nor with hemodynamic improvement. Future randomized trials may be warranted to definitively establish CRT's value in this population and refine patient selection criteria for optimal outcomes.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiac Catheterization III: Left Heart Catheterization
Review and Preview
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
Review and Preview
Random and Systematic Errors
Directing Effect of Substituents: meta-Directing Groups
Impact of Groups on Groups


