Cardiac resynchronization in Poland - comparable procedural routines? Insights from CRT Survey II.

Abstract

IntroductionCRT Survey II was initiated by the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Failure Association, to explore everyday implantation practice of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices in a broad spectrum of hospitals in European Society of Cardiology (ESC) member countries.AimTo compare Polish and European procedural practice.Material and methodsProcedural details of Polish patients collected in 37 Polish centres (n = 1241 – Poland group) were compared to the patients enrolled throughout Europe (n = 9847 – CRT II Survey group).ResultsThere were significant differences in: successful implantation (96.1% vs. 97.4%), type of device implanted (for CRT-D: 87% vs. 67.6%), implanting physician subspecialty (for electrophysiologist: 69.2% vs. 79.8%), type of location of procedure (for operating room: 19.4% vs. 8.9%), duration of procedure (117.8 ±44 vs. 97.5 ±46.1 min), left ventricle lead type (for multipolar lead: 50% vs. 57.9%), coronary sinus venogram with occlusion rate (41.4% vs. 47.9%) and peri-procedural complication rate (7.5% vs. 5.3%) between Poland and CRT II Survey groups, respectively.ConclusionsThis study provides important information describing current differences in Polish procedural routines in relation to ESC member countries. Heterogeneous CRT implantation practices across European countries still exist. However, it may be related to different clinical profile of patients qualified for CRT implantation in Poland as well as organization of care.