Long-Term Outcomes of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients With Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot: A Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A growing number of patients with tetralogy of Fallot develop left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure, in addition to right ventricular dysfunction. Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment option, the effect of CRT in this population is still not well defined. This study aimed to investigate the early and late efficacy, survival, and safety of CRT in patients with tetralogy of Fallot. METHODS: Data were analyzed from an observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort, initiated jointly by the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society and the International Society of Adult Congenital Heart Disease. Twelve centers contributed baseline and longitudinal data, including vital status, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), QRS duration, and NYHA functional class. Outcomes were analyzed at early (3 months), intermediate (1 year), and late follow-up (≥2 years) after CRT implantation. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients (40.3±19.2 years) with tetralogy of Fallot and CRT were enrolled. Twenty-nine (65.9%) patients had right ventricular pacing before CRT upgrade. The left ventricular ejection fraction improved from 32% [24%–44%] at baseline to 42% [32%–50%] at early follow-up ( P <0.001) and remained improved from baseline thereafter ( P ≤0.002). The QRS duration decreased from 180 [160–205] ms at baseline to 152 [133–182] ms at early follow-up ( P <0.001) and remained decreased at intermediate and late follow-up ( P ≤0.001). Patients with upgraded CRT had consistent improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction and QRS duration at each time point ( P ≤0.004). Patients had a significantly improved New York Heart Association functional class after CRT implantation at each time point compared with baseline ( P ≤0.002). The transplant-free survival rates at 3, 5, and 8 years after CRT implantation were 85%, 79%, and 73%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with tetralogy of Fallot treated with CRT consistent improvement in QRS duration, left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association functional class, and reasonable long-term survival were observed. The findings from this multicenter study support the consideration of CRT in this unique population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".