Which trials proved Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Device (CRTD) improves patient outcomes in patients with heart failure?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: February 5, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Key Trials Proving CRTD Improves Patient Outcomes

The COMPANION and CARE-HF trials definitively proved that cardiac resynchronization therapy devices (CRTD) improve mortality and morbidity in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction and ventricular dyssynchrony. 1

Primary Evidence: COMPANION Trial

The COMPANION (Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing, and Defibrillation in Heart Failure) trial was the landmark study that established CRTD efficacy 1:

  • Enrolled 1,520 patients with NYHA class III-IV heart failure, LVEF ≤35%, QRS duration ≥120 ms, and sinus rhythm 1
  • Three-arm design: optimal medical therapy alone vs. CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) vs. CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) 1, 2
  • Primary endpoint: Combined all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization 2, 3

COMPANION Results - Mortality Benefits:

  • CRT-D reduced all-cause mortality by 36% (P = 0.003) 1
  • CRT-P reduced mortality by 24% (P = 0.059, nearly significant) 1
  • Absolute risk reduction with CRT-D was 8.6% for cardiovascular death or hospitalization, with a number needed to treat of 12 over 16 months 1

COMPANION Results - Morbidity Benefits:

  • CRT reduced combined death or hospitalization by 35-40%, primarily driven by a 76% reduction in hospitalization rates 1
  • CRT reduced cardiac hospitalizations by 34-37% per patient-year of follow-up 2
  • Heart failure hospitalizations decreased by 41-44% per patient-year 2

Primary Evidence: CARE-HF Trial

The CARE-HF (Cardiac Resynchronization in Heart Failure) trial provided complementary evidence 1:

  • Enrolled 813 patients with NYHA class III-IV, LVEF ≤35%, QRS ≥120 ms (with additional dyssynchrony criteria if QRS 120-149 ms) 1
  • Design: Optimal medical therapy vs. CRT-P only 1, 4
  • Mean follow-up: 29.4 months 1

CARE-HF Results:

  • CRT-P reduced all-cause mortality by 36% (P < 0.002) 1
  • Extension study showed 40% mortality reduction (P < 0.0001), mainly from reduced heart failure deaths 1
  • Heart failure hospitalizations reduced by 52% 1
  • Absolute risk reduction of 16.6% with number needed to treat of 6 1

Supporting Evidence: Mild-to-Moderate Heart Failure

MADIT-CRT and RAFT trials extended CRTD benefits to less symptomatic patients 1:

MADIT-CRT:

  • Enrolled 3,618 patients with NYHA class I (15%) and II (85%), LVEF ≤30%, QRS ≥130 ms 1
  • Reduced death or heart failure events by 34% (relative risk reduction) 1
  • Mortality alone was not significantly reduced 1

RAFT:

  • Enrolled patients with NYHA class II (80%) and III (20%), LVEF ≤30%, QRS ≥120 ms 1
  • Reduced death or heart failure hospitalization by 25% 1
  • All-cause mortality reduced by 25% (P = 0.003) 1

Additional Benefits Across All Trials

Beyond mortality and hospitalization, these trials consistently demonstrated 1:

  • Symptom improvement: NYHA class decreased by 0.5-0.8 points 1
  • Exercise capacity: 6-minute walk distance increased by 20%, peak oxygen consumption by 10-15% 1
  • Cardiac remodeling: LV end-systolic volume reduced by 18% at 3 months and 26% at 18 months 1
  • LVEF improvement: Increased by 3.7% at 3 months and 6.9% at 18 months 1
  • Quality of life: Sustained improvements across all trials 1

Important Caveats

QRS duration and morphology matter significantly 1:

  • Greatest benefit occurs with QRS ≥150 ms and left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology 1
  • Benefit magnitude declines with shorter QRS duration 1
  • Non-LBBB patients show less pronounced benefit compared to LBBB patients 1

Patient selection criteria from trials 1:

  • All major trials required sinus rhythm (except RAFT, which included 13% with controlled atrial fibrillation) 1
  • Patients needed to be on optimal medical therapy including ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists 1
  • Class IV patients needed to be ambulatory with no hospitalizations in the preceding month 1

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.