The impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy on the incidence of XXXX in mild @entity712 .

@entity1 @entity712 @entity1165 @entity944 @entity2224 @entity943 @entity1002
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) decreases mortality, improves functional status, and induces reverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling in selected populations. However, the effect of CRT on @entity943 is controversial. This is particularly important among @entity1 with mild @entity712 ( @entity712 ), in whom @entity944 is a leading cause of mortality. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the impact of CRT on @entity943 in mild @entity712 . METHODS: The REsynchronization reVErses Remodeling in @entity1002 (REVERSE) study is a multicenter randomized, double-blind trial of CRT among @entity1 with mild systolic @entity712 . The time to first appropriate, treated @entity1165 / @entity2224 (VT/VF) episode or spontaneous sustained VT in cardiac resynchronization therapy plus defibrillation device (CRT-D) @entity1 was compared between groups, as were predictors of VT/VF. RESULTS: The study randomized 508 @entity1 who received CRT-D devices. There were no significant demographic differences between groups. There were no differences in VT/VF episodes or VT storm between groups. Specifically, in the CRT ON group, the estimated event rate was 18.7% at 2 years, compared with 21.9% in the CRT OFF group (hazard ratio 1.05, P = .84). However, among CRT ON @entity1 , those with reverse remodeling had a reduced incidence of VT/VF compared with those without remodeling (5.6% vs. 16.3%, hazard ratio 0.31, P = .001). CONCLUSION: CRT for up to 2 years does not impact VT/VF in mild @entity712 despite marked clinical and remodeling effects of pacing. This neutral effect may be attributable to competing antiarrhythmic effects of reverse remodeling and proarrhythmic effect of pacing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00271154.
