Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry
Alken F-A, Senges J, Schneider S, Hochadel M, Brachmann J, Kleemann T, Eckardt L, Steinbeck G, Leschke M, Stellbrink C, Zrenner B, et al. (2024)
Scientific Reports 14(1): 29189.
Zeitschriftenaufsatz
| Veröffentlicht | Englisch
Download
Es wurden keine Dateien hochgeladen. Nur Publikationsnachweis!
Autor*in
Alken, Fares-Alexander;
Senges, Jochen;
Schneider, Steffen;
Hochadel, Matthias;
Brachmann, Johannes;
Kleemann, Thomas;
Eckardt, Lars;
Steinbeck, Gerhard;
Leschke, Matthias;
Stellbrink, ChristophUniBi;
Zrenner, Bernhard;
Becker, Rüdiger
Alle
Alle
Einrichtung
Abstract / Bemerkung
Resting heart rate (RHR) has prognostic implications in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, where <= 70 bpm is targeted. Whether a RHR > 70 bpm assessed within clinical practice goes along with elevated cardiovascular risk in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) / cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) recipients remains incompletely understood. A total of 1589 patients (ICD n = 1172 / CRT-D n = 417, median age 65 years, 22.6% female) undergoing ICD/CRT-D implantation or revision in the prospective German DEVICE multicenter registry were analyzed. RHR was assessed via a 12-channel electrocardiogram at enrollment. 1-year outcomes (all-cause mortality, major cardio- and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause hospital admission) were compared between patients with a RHR <= 70 bpm and > 70 bpm. 733 patients (46.1%) showed a RHR > 70 bpm. Median RHR was 63 (interquartile range 59; 68) bpm (<= 70 bpm group) and 80 (75; 89) bpm (> 70 bpm group). Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction was present in 76.3%, a prior myocardial infarction in 32.4% and non-ischemic heart disease in 44.9%. One-year all-cause mortality was similar between RHR groups (<= 70 bpm 5.4% vs. > 70 bpm 5.4%, p = 0.96), and subgroup analysis regarding patient characteristics and comorbidities revealed only a significantly higher rate of patients with dual chamber ICD in the > 70 bpm group (0.8% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.003). MACCE (5.9% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.87) and defibrillator shock rates (9.9% vs. 9.8%, p = 1.0) were similar. Higher all-cause hospital admission rates were observed in patients with > 70 bpm RHR (23.1% vs. 29.0%, p = 0.027) driven by non-cardiovascular events (6.0% vs. 11.7%, p = 0.001). In conclusion, in ICD and CRT-D recipients a RHR at admission > 70 bpm may indicate patients at increased risk of all-cause hospital admission but not of other adverse cardiovascular events or death at 1-year follow-up.
Stichworte
Heart rate;
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator;
Cardiac;
resynchronization therapy-defibrillator;
Cardiac pacing;
Sudden cardiac;
death
Erscheinungsjahr
2024
Zeitschriftentitel
Scientific Reports
Band
14
Ausgabe
1
Art.-Nr.
29189
eISSN
2045-2322
Page URI
https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2999539
Zitieren
Alken F-A, Senges J, Schneider S, et al. Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry. Scientific Reports . 2024;14(1): 29189.
Alken, F. - A., Senges, J., Schneider, S., Hochadel, M., Brachmann, J., Kleemann, T., Eckardt, L., et al. (2024). Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry. Scientific Reports , 14(1), 29189. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-78851-z
Alken, Fares-Alexander, Senges, Jochen, Schneider, Steffen, Hochadel, Matthias, Brachmann, Johannes, Kleemann, Thomas, Eckardt, Lars, et al. 2024. “Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry”. Scientific Reports 14 (1): 29189.
Alken, F. - A., Senges, J., Schneider, S., Hochadel, M., Brachmann, J., Kleemann, T., Eckardt, L., Steinbeck, G., Leschke, M., Stellbrink, C., et al. (2024). Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry. Scientific Reports 14:29189.
Alken, F.-A., et al., 2024. Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry. Scientific Reports , 14(1): 29189.
F.-A. Alken, et al., “Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry”, Scientific Reports , vol. 14, 2024, : 29189.
Alken, F.-A., Senges, J., Schneider, S., Hochadel, M., Brachmann, J., Kleemann, T., Eckardt, L., Steinbeck, G., Leschke, M., Stellbrink, C., Zrenner, B., Becker, R., Kahle, A.-K., Meyer, C.: Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry. Scientific Reports . 14, : 29189 (2024).
Alken, Fares-Alexander, Senges, Jochen, Schneider, Steffen, Hochadel, Matthias, Brachmann, Johannes, Kleemann, Thomas, Eckardt, Lars, Steinbeck, Gerhard, Leschke, Matthias, Stellbrink, Christoph, Zrenner, Bernhard, Becker, Rüdiger, Kahle, Ann-Kathrin, and Meyer, Christian. “Resting heart rate assessed within clinical practice demonstrates no prognostic relevance for defibrillator recipients in the German DEVICE registry”. Scientific Reports 14.1 (2024): 29189.
Daten bereitgestellt von European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI)
Zitationen in Europe PMC
Daten bereitgestellt von Europe PubMed Central.
References
Daten bereitgestellt von Europe PubMed Central.
Export
Markieren/ Markierung löschen
Markierte Publikationen
Web of Science
Dieser Datensatz im Web of Science®Quellen
PMID: 39587151
PubMed | Europe PMC
Suchen in