OBJECTIVES: To compare the contemporary practice of CRT implantation in Scandinavia and Europe.
DESIGN: We used data from The European CRT Survey II to highlight similarities and differences in the practice of CRT implantation between Europe (EUR) and Scandinavia (SCAND) and between the Scandinavian countries Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Implant data from the national pacemaker registries were used to calculate coverage.
RESULTS: The coverage was 24% in SCAND and 11% in EUR. SCAND patients were more often referred from another centre and follow-up was less often to be performed at the operating centre. Telemonitoring was more commonly used. More patients had AV-block or pacemaker dependency/expected high RV pacing percentage as indication for CRT. A CRT-P was more commonly used, and ischaemic aetiology was slightly less common. Echocardiography was more often used to determine LVEF, as well as occlusive venography and placing the RV lead first. In DK implanters tended to choose a septal RV position. Quadripolar leads were more often and a test shock less often used. The paced QRS duration was slightly longer and the narrowing of QRS with CRT more limited. Procedure times and preoperative LVEF were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: In Scandinavia AV-conduction disturbance and/or a ventricular pacing indication was a more common indication for CRT, suggesting adaptation of the most recent guidelines ahead of their publication. A test shock was almost never performed, in agreement with recent scientific evidence. CRT-P was more often used, the procedures seem more centralized and quadripolar leads were preferred.
|Tidsskrift||Scandinavian cardiovascular journal : SCJ|
|Status||Udgivet - feb. 2019|