Literature DB >> 11401131

Recurrence of symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator after the first device therapy: implications for antiarrhythmic therapy and driving restrictions. CARE Group.

N A Freedberg1, J N Hill, R I Fogel, E N Prystowsky.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether clinical or electrophysiologic characteristics could predict initial and subsequent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy.
BACKGROUND: Identification of markers to predict subsequent ICD therapy and symptoms after the first event could affect patient management.
METHODS: We analyzed baseline and follow-up data on 125 ICD patients followed for 408+/-321 days. Medications and ICD programming were not changed after first ICD therapy.
RESULTS: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy occurred in 58 patients (46%). Clinical features were as follows: mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 29%+/-15%; coronary artery disease 84%; presenting arrhythmia with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT) in 68%. In a multivariate analysis the relative risk for ICD therapy in patients presenting with SMVT versus cardiac arrest (CA) was 2.57 (range, 1.32 to 5.01), and for patients with LVEF < or =25%, 1.95 (1.11 to 3.45), respectively (p < 0.05). Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy was not predicted by any other variable. Forty-six patients had second ICD therapy. Mean time to second ICD therapy was only 66+/-93 days compared with 138+/-168 days for first ICD therapy (p < 0.05). No predictor for second ICD therapy was found. Regarding symptoms, impaired consciousness during initial ICD therapy was predicted only by SMVT cycle length <250 ms at electrophysiologic testing. In contrast, symptoms were similar between first and second ICD therapy (p = 0.0001). Of note, ventricular tachycardia cycle length preceding first and second ICD therapy was similar (r = 0.76, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: First ICD therapy tends to occur in patients presenting with SMVT and LVEF < or =25%. Subsequent therapy occurs sooner and is unpredictable, suggesting that antiarrhythmic drug therapy should be considered after the first symptomatic ICD therapy. Symptoms during first ICD therapy predict subsequent symptoms, and patients presenting with SMVT and asymptomatic first ICD therapy are at very low risk for future syncopal ICD therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11401131     DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01226-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  10 in total

Review 1.  Recommendations for driving after implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation and the use of a wearable cardioverter defibrillator : Different viewpoints around the world.

Authors:  Mona Cooper; Theresa Berent; Johann Auer; Robert Berent
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 1.704

2.  Electrophysiologic study: its predictive value for ventricular arrhythmias.

Authors:  Daniel R Gold; John N Catanzaro; John N Makaryus; Cory Waldman; William H Sauer; Cristina Sison; Amgad N Makaryus; Erik Altman; Ram Jadonath; Stuart Beldner
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2010

3.  Preimplantation B-type natriuretic peptide concentration is an independent predictor of future appropriate implantable defibrillator therapies.

Authors:  A Verma; F Kilicaslan; D O Martin; S Minor; R Starling; N F Marrouche; S Almahammed; O M Wazni; S Duggal; R Zuzek; H Yamaji; J Cummings; M K Chung; P J Tchou; A Natale
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-05-27       Impact factor: 5.994

4.  Driving guidelines and restrictions in patients with a history of cardiac arrhythmias, syncope,or implantable devices.

Authors:  Dan Sorajja; Win-Kuang Shen
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2010-10

5.  What evidence do we have to replace in-hospital implantable cardioverter defibrillator follow-up?

Authors:  P Brugada
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 6.  Approach to antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with ICDs and frequent activations.

Authors:  Arnold Pinter; Paul Dorian
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.931

7.  Driving restrictions after implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation: an evidence-based approach.

Authors:  Joep Thijssen; C Jan Willem Borleffs; Johannes B van Rees; Mihály K de Bie; Enno T van der Velde; Lieselot van Erven; Jeroen J Bax; Suzanne C Cannegieter; Martin J Schalij
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2011-06-05       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  Left ventricle remodeling predicts the recurrence of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients for secondary prevention.

Authors:  Wei-Chieh Lee; Huang-Chung Chen; Yung-Lung Chen; Tzu-Hsien Tsai; Kuo-Li Pan; Yu-Sheng Lin; Mien-Cheng Chen
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 9.  Driving restrictions in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators and pacemakers.

Authors:  Eiichi Watanabe; Haruhiko Abe; Shigeyuki Watanabe
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2017-03-28

10.  Inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks-incidence, effect, and implications for driver licensing.

Authors:  Eiichi Watanabe; Katsunori Okajima; Akira Shimane; Tomoya Ozawa; Tetsuyuki Manaka; Itsuro Morishima; Toru Asai; Masahiko Takagi; Toshihiro Honda; Atsunobu Kasai; Eitaro Fujii; Kohei Yamashiro; Ritsuko Kohno; Haruhiko Abe; Takashi Noda; Takashi Kurita; Shigeyuki Watanabe; Hiroya Ohmori; Takashi Nitta; Yoshifusa Aizawa; Ken Kiyono; Ken Okumura
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 1.900

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.