This Article Free upon publication Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McAlister, F. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by McAlister, F. A. Related Collections Congestive Other Treatment

(Circulation. 2008;118:901-903.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Editorial

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Heart Failure

A Hammer in Search of Nails

Finlay A. McAlister, MD, MSc

From the Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Correspondence Dr F. McAlister, 2E3.24 Walter Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 8440 112 St, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2R7.

Key Words: Editorials • heart failure • pacemakers

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

A number of randomized clinical trials have clearly established that cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves ventricular function and symptom status while reducing hospitalizations and mortality in heart failure patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% who have New York Heart Association class III or IV symptoms despite optimal medical management, are in sinus rhythm, and have evidence of ventricular electromechanical dyssynchrony.¹ Because the outcomes for patients with heart failure remain poor despite maximal pharmacotherapy and because the magnitude of the benefits from CRT is similar to that reported for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and β-blockers, the rapid increase in CRT device implants in patients with heart failure over the past few years is not surprising.² Although ongoing trials continue to test the efficacy and safety of CRT in patient groups who were underrepresented or excluded from prior trials, the CRT evidence base is evolving and following the well-established pattern of investigation for technological advances in which health services researchers follow the clinical trialists into an area to evaluate the uptake, effectiveness, and safety of new technologies when deployed in routine clinical practice. As a first step in this process, the study by Piccini and colleagues³ in this week’s Circulation examines who is, and who is not, receiving CRT in routine clinical practice.

Article p 926

In their prospective cohort study of patients hospitalized for heart failure between 2005 and 2007 in 228 US hospitals participating in the American Heart Association’s Get With the Guidelines–Heart Failure Program, Piccini et al³ had . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Gheorghiade and P. S. Pang Acute heart failure syndromes. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 17, 2009; 53(7): 557 - 573. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]