Educational supervision in internal medicine residency training - a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Although supervision is an important part of residency training, its scope and how it relates to other types of support, such as mentoring, precepting and feedback, remain unclear. While clinical supervision consists of ongoing instructions and feedback in the workplace setting, educational supervision is a formalized component of postgraduate medical educational and supports the process that facilitates a trainee's progression throughout their training. Since medical specialties have different supervisory traditions, this study focuses on educational supervision in internal medicine. Our aim was to investigate what is known about educational supervision practices in internal medicine and the role of educational supervision in supporting residents' learning. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the literature on educational supervision in residency training in internal medicine based on Levac et al.'s modification of Arksey and O'Malley's six-step framework. The literature search was performed in the following databases: Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Educational Resources Information Center. In addition, we conducted a handsearch in Medical Teacher and Google Scholar. We followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic research. RESULTS: Eighteen of the 3,284 identified articles were included in the analysis. We found few empirical studies describing how educational supervision is conducted and what effect routine educational supervision has on residents' learning. Our findings suggest that the terminology can be confusing and that educational supervision practices in internal medicine has a weak theoretical foundation. CONCLUSION: The distinction between educational supervision and other support structures, such as mentoring and feedback, has not been clearly defined in the research literature. We argue that shared terminology is needed to better understand current educational practices and to facilitate clear communication about how to help residents learn.

What determines who gets cardiac resynchronization therapy in Europe? A comparison between ESC-HF-LT registry, SwedeHF registry, and ESC-CRT Survey II.

AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is effective in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and dyssynchrony but is underutilized. In a cohort study, we identified clinical, organizational, and level of care factors linked to CRT implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included HFrEF patients fulfilling study criteria in the ESC-HF-Long Term Registry (ESC-HF-LT, n = 1031), the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) (n = 5008), and the ESC-CRT Survey II (n = 11 088). In ESC-HF-LT, 36% had a CRT indication of which 47% had CRT, 53% had indication but no CRT, and the remaining 54% had no indication and no CRT. In SwedeHF, these percentages were 30, 25, 75, and 70%. Median age of patients with CRT indication and CRT present vs. absent was 68 vs. 65 years with 24% vs. 22% women in ESC-HF-LT, 76 vs. 74 years with 26% vs. 26% women in SwedeHF, and 70 years with 24% women in CRT Survey II (all had CRT). For ESC-HF-LT, independent predictors of having CRT were guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), atrial fibrillation (AF), prior HF hospitalization, and NYHA class. For SwedeHF, they were GDMT, age, AF, previous myocardial infarction, lower NYHA class, enrolment at university hospital, and follow-up at HF centre/Hospital. In SwedeHF, above median income and higher education level were also independently associated with having CRT. In the ESC-CRT Survey II (n = 11 088), all patients received CRT but with differences in the clinical characteristics between countries. CONCLUSION: CRT was used in a minority of eligible patients and more used in ESC-HF-LT than in SwedeHF.

Upgrades from Previous Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Compared to De Novo Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Implantations: Results from CRT Survey-II in the Turkish Population.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac resynchronization therapy is the guideline-directed treatment option in selected heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction patients. Data regarding the contemporary clinical practice of cardiac resynchronization therapy in Turkey have been published recently. This sub-study aims to compare clinical and periprocedural characteristics between cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrade and de novo implantations. METHODS: Turkish arm of the Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey-II was conducted between October 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016, at 16 centers. All consecutive patients who underwent an upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy system (n=60) or de novo cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation (n=335) were eligible. RESULTS: Distribution of age, gender, and heart failure etiology were similar in the 2 groups. Atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, and chronic kidney disease were more common in cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrade patients. Narrow intrinsic QRS duration and left ventricular ejection fraction being 75% in both groups, and only beta-blockers were prescribed at rates of >90% in both groups. CONCLUSION: Cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrades are performed with high procedural success rates and without excess periprocedural complication risk. Feared complications of cardiac resynchronization therapy upgrades due to the pre-existing device should not delay the procedure if indicated.

Current clinical practice of cardiac resynchronization therapy in Turkey: Reflections from Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey-II.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been shown to reduce mortality in selected patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). CRT Survey-II was a snapshot survey to assess current clinical practice with regard to CRT. Herein, we aimed to compare Turkish data with other countries of European Society of Cardiology (ESC). METHODS: The survey was conducted between October 2015 and December 2016 in 42 ESC member countries. All consecutive patients who underwent a de novo CRT implantation or a CRT upgrade were eligible. RESULTS: A total of 288 centers included 11,088 patients. From Turkey, 16 centers recruited 424 patients representing 12.9% of all implantations. Compared to the entire cohort, Turkish patients were younger with a lower proportion of men and a higher proportion with ischemic etiology. Electrocardiography (ECG) showed sinus rhythm in 81.5%, a QRS duration of <130 ms in 10.1%, and ≥150 ms in 63.8% of patients. Left bundle branch block (LBBB) was more common. Median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 25%, lower than in the overall ESC cohort, but NYHA class was more often II. Most common indication for CRT implantation was HF with a wide QRS (70.8%). Almost 98.3% of devices implanted were CRT-D, in contrast to the overall cohort. Fluoroscopy time was longer, but duration of overall procedure was shorter. LV lead implantation was unsuccessful in 2.6% patients. Periprocedural complication rate was 6.3%. The most common complication was bleeding. Remote monitoring was less utilized. CONCLUSION: These are the first observational data reflecting the current CRT practice in Turkey and comparing it with other countries of Europe. Findings of this study may help detect gaps and provide insights for improvement.

Second European Society of Cardiology Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey: the Italian cohort.

AIM: Adherence to guidelines was not homogeneous in Europe, according to the survey on cardiac resynchronization therapy conducted in 2008-2009. The aim of our study was to compare the results in the Italian and European cohorts of the Second European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey. METHODS: Patients' characteristics, procedural data and follow-up were collected. Italian records were compared with European countries. RESULTS: Italian hospitals enrolled 526 patients. The italian cohort was older (71.6 ±â€Š9.5 vs. 68.4 ±â€Š10.8; P < 0.00001), had less severe NYHA class (>II 47.2 vs. 59.6%; P < 0.00001), higher ejection fraction (30.3 ±â€Š7.4 vs. 28.4 ±â€Š8.2%; P < 0.00001), and less atrial fibrillation prevalence (34.4 vs. 41.2%; P = 0.00197) than the European cohort. Italian patients were more frequently hospitalized for heart failure in the previous year (51.9 vs. 46.2%; P = 0.01118) and had lower mean QRS duration (151 ±â€Š26 vs. 157 ±â€Š27 ms; P < 0.0001). CRT-D were more often implanted in Italian patients (79.3 vs. 69.3%; P < 0.00001). The complication rate was similar (4.6% vs. 5.6%; ns). The rate of use of ACEi/ARBs in Italy was lower than in Europe (77.2 vs. 86.9%; P < 0.00001). Patients were followed up in the implantation centre (92.1 vs. 86%; P = 0.00014), but rarely with remote monitoring (25.9 vs. 30%; P = 0.04792). CONCLUSION: The survey demonstrates important similarities as well as substantial differences regarding most of the aspects evaluated. Efforts to implement adherence to guidelines will be endorsed in Italy.

Adherence to ESC cardiac resynchronization therapy guidelines: findings from the ESC CRT Survey II.

AIMS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and electrical dyssynchrony. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations indicating optimal patient selection for CRT implantation in both the 2013 European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the 2016 Heart Failure Association (HFA) Guidelines. We assessed the adherence to guidelines and identified factors associated with guideline adherence. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 2016, the HFA and EHRA conducted the CRT Survey II in 42 ESC countries. The data collected were sufficient to evaluate adherence to guidelines in 8021 patients. Of these, 67% had a Class I guideline indication for CRT implantation, which was significantly correlated with female gender (1.70, P < 0.0001), age <75 years (1.55, P < 0.0001), non-ischaemic HF aetiology (1.22, P < 0.0001), and elective admission (1.87, P < 0.0001). A further 26% of implants had a Class IIa indication, 5% IIb and only 2% a contraindication to CRT-a Class III indication. Patients implanted under Level IIa indications were much more likely to have more comorbidities than patients implanted under Level I indications. However, there were large variations in guideline adherence between ESC countries. CONCLUSION: Implanters in ESC member states demonstrate a high degree of adherence to ESC guidelines with 98% of implants having a documented Class I, IIa or IIb indication. Cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation without a Class I indication was more likely in men, patients age ≥75 years, with HF of ischaemic origin and in patients admitted to hospital acutely.

Correction to: CRT Survey II: a European Society of Cardiology (ESC) survey of cardiac resynchronization therapy-an Irish subset analysis.

In the original version of this article, the author list contained a number of errors, namely a missing author name, and author names that had been merged incorrectly.

CRT Survey II: a European Society of Cardiology (ESC) survey of cardiac resynchronization therapy-an Irish subset analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been shown to reduce mortality and morbidity in symptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular systolic function < 35%, a left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a widened QRS complex. This paper compares Irish national CRT practices with the European data that was gathered in the same multi-centre CRT Survey II. METHODS: Each recruiting centre completed an internet-based facilitating collection of information relating to health care resource utilization by each centre. A second form was completed for consecutive patients undergoing CRT implantation, to provide information on patient demographics, pre-implantation clinical evaluation and investigations, indication for implantation and the procedure as well as short-term complications and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients from 2 centres were representative of the current Irish practice and compared with data obtained. This was 26.6% of all CRT implantations in Ireland during this period (total number 319, 88 CRT-P, 231 CRT-D). Of those receiving CRT device, mean age was 73 years, 74.1% were male, with predominantly NYHA class III symptoms, and left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%. NT-pro-BNP level was substantially elevated in most patients. 56% were in sinus rhythm, 31% in atrial fibrillation with overall mean QRS duration of 166 ms. CONCLUSIONS: Within Ireland, the majority of CRT implantation are adherent with ESC guidelines. It has also highlighted problems that are noted in other ESC member countries such as the underutilization of device therapy in women, lack of referrals from peripheral centres and further need for optimization of medical therapy before device implantation.

Arrhythmic risk stratification in non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy beyond ejection fraction.

Sudden cardiac death and arrhythmia-related events in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NICM) have been significantly reduced over the last couple of decades as a result of evidence-based pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies. Nevertheless, the arrhythmic stratification in patients with NICM remains extremely challenging, and the simple indication based on left ventricular ejection fraction appears to be insufficient. Therefore, clinicians need to go beyond the current criteria for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in the direction of a multiparametric evaluation of arrhythmic risk. Several parameters for arrhythmic risk stratification, ranging from electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, imaging-derived and genetic markers, are crucial for proper arrhythmic risk stratification and a multiparametric evaluation of risk in patients with NICM. In particular, integration of cardiac magnetic resonance parameters (mostly late gadolinium enhancement) and specific genetic information (ie, presence of LMNA, PLN, FLNC mutations) appears fundamental for proper implementation of the current arrhythmic risk stratification. Finally, a novel approach focused on both arrhythmic risk and prediction of left ventricular reverse remodelling during follow-up might be useful for effective multiparametric and dynamic arrhythmic risk stratification in NICM. In the future, a complete and integrated evaluation might be mandatory to implement arrhythmic risk prediction in patients with NICM and to discriminate the competing risk between heart failure-related events and life-threatening arrhythmias.

Benchmarking Belgian CRT practice against the rest of Europe: insights from the ESC-CRT survey II.

This subanalysis of the Euro-CRT survey II specifically focus on Belgian practice for CRT implantation. It explores Belgian adherence with the guidelines but also benchmark CRT practice in Belgium against the other European countries. Overall, Belgian management of CRT implantation is performed with great agreement with guidelines. This report could be used to provide guidance for both practical and economical approaches.

Comparison of current German and European practice in cardiac resynchronization therapy: lessons from the ESC/EHRA/HFA CRT Survey II.

INTRODUCTION: The European CRT Survey II was introduced to offer insights into CRT implantation practice in Europe. We compared the national data from the participating German centres with that of the other European countries with regard to differences in patient selection, implant results, and initial properties. METHODS AND RESULTS: 11,088 patients were enrolled in 288 centres from 42 countries between 2015 and 2017. Of these, 675 (6.1%) were included in 17 centres in Germany. Patients from Germany were older, had more comorbidities and more symptoms of heart failure (HF) than patients from other European countries. There were no differences with regard to HF aetiology and guideline-directed medical treatment was overall well implemented. There was a high use of CRT in patients with atrial fibrillation, even higher in German patients. CRT was most often applied due to HF with wide QRS complex (class I recommendation) but with relatively higher frequency in Germany due to HF with primary indication for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (class IIb) or a pacemaker with expected pacing dependency (class I). The overall implant success rate was high with some differences in the implant procedure. The use of remote monitoring was lower in Germany. CONCLUSION: This analysis from the European CRT Survey II overall shows good guideline adherence, high implantation success and a low rate of complications in daily practice. There are some regional differences in baseline characteristics, CRT indication, and procedural aspects. The use of remote monitoring in Germany lags behind other European countries.

Resultados en España de la encuesta de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología sobre terapia de resincronización cardiaca (CRT-Survey II) / Spanish results of the Second European Cardiac resynchronization therapy survey (CRT-Survey II)

Introducción y objetivos: Se describen los resultados en España de la segunda encuesta de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología sobre terapia de resincronización cardiaca (CRT-Survey II) y se comparan con los de los demás países participantes. Métodos: Pacientes a los que se implantó un dispositivo de terapia de resincronización cardiaca entre octubre de 2015 y diciembre de 2016 en 36 centros participantes. Se recogieron datos sobre las características basales de los pacientes y del implante, y un seguimiento a corto plazo hasta el alta hospitalaria. Resultados: La tasa de éxito del implante fue del 95,9%. La mediana [intervalo intercuartílico] de implantes anuales/centro en España fue significativamente menor que en los demás países participantes: 30 [21-50] frente a 55 [33-100] implantes/año (p=0,00003). En los centros españoles hubo una menor proporción de pacientes de edad ≥ 75 años (el 27,9 frente al 32,4%; p=0,0071), una mayor proporción de pacientes en clase funcional II de la New York Heart Association (el 46,9 frente al 36,9%; p <0,00001) y un mayor porcentaje de pacientes con criterios electrocardiográficos de bloqueo de rama izquierda (el 82,9 frente al 74,6%; p <0,00001). La media de la estancia hospitalaria fue menor en los centros españoles (5,8+/-8,5 frente a 6,4+/-11,6; p <0,00001) y una mayor proporción de pacientes recibieron un cable de ventrículo izquierdo cuadripolar (el 74 frente al 56%; p <0,00001) y fueron seguidos a distancia (el 55,8 frente al 27,7%; p <0,00001). Conclusiones: La encuesta CRT-Survey II muestra que en España hay una menor proporción de pacientes de 75 o más años que reciben un dispositivo de terapia de resincronización cardiaca, una mayor proporción de pacientes en clase funcional II de la New York Heart Association, con bloqueo completo de la rama izquierda del haz de His y con seguimiento a distancia, con estancias hospitalarias significativamente menores

Introduction and objectives: We describe the results for Spain of the Second European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey (CRT-Survey II) and compare them with those of the other participating countries. Methods: We included patients undergoing CRT device implantation between October 2015 and December 2016 in 36 participating Spanish centers. We registered the patients' baseline characteristics, implant procedure data, and short-term follow-up information until hospital discharge. Results: Implant success was achieved in 95.9%. The median [interquartile range] annual implantation rate by center was significantly lower in Spain than in the other participating countries: 30 implants/y [21-50] vs 55 implants/y [33-100]; P=.00003. In Spanish centers, there was a lower proportion of patients ≥ 75 years (27.9% vs 32.4%; P=.0071), a higher proportion in NYHA class II (46.9% vs 36.9%, P <.00001), and a higher percentage with electrocardiographic criteria of left bundle branch block (82.9% vs 74.6%; P <.00001). The mean length of hospital stay was significantly lower in Spanish centers (5.8+/-8.5 days vs 6.4+/-11.6; P <.00001). Spanish patients were more likely to receive a quadripolar LV lead (74% vs 56%, P <.00001) and to be followed up by remote monitoring (55.8% vs 27.7%; P <.00001). Conclusions: The CRT-Survey II shows that, compared with other participating countries, fewer patients in Spain aged ≥ 75 years received a CRT device, while more patients were in New York Heart Association functional class II and had left bundle branch block. In addition, the length of hospital stay was shorter, and there was greater use of quadripolar LV leads and remote CRT monitoring

The European Society of Cardiology Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey II: A comparison of cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation practice in Europe and France.

BACKGROUND: The first European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) Survey, conducted in 2008-2009, showed considerable variations in guideline adherence and implantation practice. A second prospective survey (CRT Survey II) was then performed to describe contemporary clinical practice regarding CRT among 42 European countries. AIM: To compare the characteristics of French CRT recipients with the overall European population of CRT Survey II. METHODS: Demographic and procedural data from French centres recruiting all consecutive patients undergoing either de novo CRT implantation or an upgrade to a CRT system were collected and compared with data from the European population. RESULTS: A total of 11,088 patients were enrolled in CRT Survey II, 754 of whom were recruited in France. French patients were older (44.7% aged≥75 years vs 31.1% in the European group), had less severe heart failure symptoms, a higher baseline left ventricular ejection fraction and fewer co-morbidities. Additionally, French patients had a shorter intrinsic QRS duration (19.1% had a QRS<130ms vs 12.3% in the European cohort). Successful implantation rates were similar, but procedural and fluoroscopy times were shorter in France. French patients were more likely to receive a CRT pacemaker than European patients overall. Of note, antibiotic prophylaxis was reported to be administered less frequently in France, and a higher rate of early device-related infection was observed. Importantly, French patients were less likely to receive optimal drugs for treating heart failure at hospital discharge. CONCLUSION: This study highlights contemporary clinical practice in France, and describes substantial differences in patient selection, implantation procedure and outcomes compared with the other European countries participating in CRT Survey II.

Sex-Related Procedural Aspects and Complications in CRT Survey II: A Multicenter European Experience in 11,088 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare sex difference for procedural aspects and complications in the European Society of Cardiology CRT Survey II, exploring whether adverse events were related to the type of CRT device implanted. BACKGROUND: Sex-related differences in procedural aspects and complications in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation has not been explored in a real-life population. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of procedural data and complications in different sexes and factors associated with events was performed from data collected in the European Society of Cardiology CRT Survey II. RESULTS: Of all patients (n = 11,088) included, 24.3% were women. The mean age (70 years of age) of male and female recipients was similar. Female patients more frequently had an idiopathic cardiomyopathy (67.4% vs. 44.1%) and fewer comorbidities, including atrial fibrillation (34.8% vs. 42.8%), diabetes (29.1% vs. 32.1%), chronic obstructive lung disease (10.3% vs. 12.6%), and renal failure (28.7% vs. 31.9%), compared with men. More women compared with men had a pacemaker (56.6% vs. 46.3%) and much less often an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D) (19.0% vs. 34.7%) implant. Periprocedural event rate was the highest in women with CRT with defibrillator (7.1% vs. 4.8% in men), followed by women with a CRT with pacing (5.5% vs. 4.4% in men). The higher periprocedural event rate in CRT-D women was attributable primarily to the occurrence of pneumothorax (1.4%), coronary sinus dissection (2.1%), and pericardial tamponade (0.3%). The rate of in-hospital major adverse events (6.0%) and complications necessitating reoperation (4.0%) was not different among sex and device type. CONCLUSIONS: Women are more likely to experience adverse procedure-related events during CRT implantation. Thus, preventive strategies should be employed to minimize complication rate.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator: what determines the choice?-findings from the ESC CRT Survey II.

AIMS: The decision to implant a cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker (CRT-P) or a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) may be challenging. There are no clear guideline recommendations as no randomized study of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been designed to compare the effects of CRT-P with those of CRT-D on patients' outcomes. In the CRT Survey II, we studied patient and implantation centre characteristics associated with the choice of CRT-P vs. CRT-D. METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinical practice data from 10 692 patients undergoing CRT implantation of whom 7467 (70%) patients received a CRT-D and 3225 (30%) received a CRT-P across 42 ESC countries were collected and analysed between October 2015 and January 2017. Factors favouring the selection of CRT-P implantation included age >75 years, female gender, non-ischaemic heart failure (HF) aetiology, New York Heart Association functional Class III/IV symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction >25%, atrial fibrillation, atrioventricular (AV) block II/III, and implantation in a university hospital. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort from the CRT Survey II, we found that patients allocated to receive CRT-P exhibited particular phenotypes with more symptomatic HF, more frequent comorbidities, advanced age, female gender, non-ischaemic HF aetiology, atrial fibrillation, and evidence of AV block. There were substantial differences in the proportion of patients allocated to receive CRT-P vs. CRT-D between countries.

Spanish Results of the Second European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey (CRT-Survey II).

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: We describe the results for Spain of the Second European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Survey (CRT-Survey II) and compare them with those of the other participating countries. METHODS: We included patients undergoing CRT device implantation between October 2015 and December 2016 in 36 participating Spanish centers. We registered the patients' baseline characteristics, implant procedure data, and short-term follow-up information until hospital discharge. RESULTS: Implant success was achieved in 95.9%. The median [interquartile range] annual implantation rate by center was significantly lower in Spain than in the other participating countries: 30 implants/y [21-50] vs 55 implants/y [33-100]; P=.00003. In Spanish centers, there was a lower proportion of patients ≥ 75 years (27.9% vs 32.4%; P=.0071), a higher proportion in New York Heart Association functional class II (46.9% vs 36.9%; P <.00001), and a higher percentage with electrocardiographic criteria of left bundle branch block (82.9% vs 74.6%; P <.00001). The mean length of hospital stay was significantly lower in Spanish centers (5.8±8.5 days vs 6.4±11.6; P <.00001). Spanish patients were more likely to receive a quadripolar LV lead (74% vs 56%; P <.00001) and to be followed up by remote monitoring (55.8% vs 27.7%; P <.00001). CONCLUSIONS: The CRT-Survey II shows that, compared with other participating countries, fewer patients in Spain aged ≥ 75 years received a CRT device, while more patients were in New York Heart Association functional class II and had left bundle branch block. In addition, the length of hospital stay was shorter, and there was greater use of quadripolar LV leads and remote CRT monitoring.

Beyond pharmacological treatment: an insight into therapies that target specific aspects of heart failure pathophysiology.

Heart failure is a common syndrome associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The management of symptoms and the strategies for improving prognosis have largely been based on pharmacological treatments. The pathophysiology of heart failure is complex because of the multiple causes responsible for this syndrome. This Series paper presents some examples of advances in heart failure management, in which the treatment specifically targets the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for the symptoms. These treatments include treatment of electromechanical dyssynchrony and dysrhythmia by cardiac resynchronisation and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators; neurohumoral modification by baroreflex and vagal stimulation; prevention of adverse cardiac remodelling by interatrial shunts; and finally targeting the myocardium directly by cell therapy in an attempt to regenerate new myocardial cells.

Contemporary practice of CRT implantation in scandinavia compared to Europe.

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.

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

INTRODUCTION: CRT 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. AIM: To compare Polish and European procedural practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Procedural 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). RESULTS: There 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. CONCLUSIONS: This 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.