Literature DB >> 18284493

Time-dependence of appropriate implantable defibrillator therapy in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.

Alawi A Alsheikh-Ali1, Michael Homer, Prasad V Maddukuri, Benjamin Kalsmith, N A Mark Estes, Mark S Link.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the risk of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy outside the context of controlled clinical trials where routine practice patients are followed for longer durations and questions of device replacement frequently arise. We assessed the incidence and time-dependence of appropriate ICD therapy in a routine clinical practice primary prevention population with prior myocardial infarction (MI) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). METHODS AND
RESULTS: Patients with prior MI and LVEF <or=35%, who received an ICD at our institution (1995-2005) for primary prevention, were identified. Incidence and time-dependence of first appropriate ICD therapy for ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and rapid VA (cycle length <or=260 ms) were determined. Of 525 ICD recipients for primary prevention, 115 (22%) had appropriate ICD therapy. Incidence of first appropriate ICD therapy was highest in the first year postimplant (20%), decreased to 12% in year 2, and remained at 6-11% yearly thereafter. A similar trend was observed with rapid VA, a higher risk in the first year (6%), and a lower but persistent risk thereafter (3.8% in year 7).
CONCLUSION: In a routine clinical practice primary prevention population with prior MI and LVEF <or=35%, the incidence of first ICD therapy for VA, including potentially life-threatening VA, is highest in the first year postimplant, and persists for up to seven years thereafter. Risk of first appropriate ICD therapy persists over time, and thus replacement of ICDs appears to be indicated for all patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18284493     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01111.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1045-3873


  5 in total

1.  Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator elective generator replacement: a procedure for all?

Authors:  Sergio Barra; Manoj Goonewardene; Patrick Heck; David Begley; Munmohan Virdee; Simon Fynn; Andrew Grace; Sharad Agarwal
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  Outcomes After Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Generator Replacement for Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death.

Authors:  Malini Madhavan; Jonathan W Waks; Paul A Friedman; Daniel B Kramer; Alfred E Buxton; Peter A Noseworthy; Ramila A Mehta; David O Hodge; Angela Y Higgins; Tracy L Webster; Chance M Witt; Yong-Mei Cha; Bernard J Gersh
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-03

3.  Predicting appropriate shocks in patients with heart failure: Patient level meta-analysis from SCD-HeFT and MADIT II.

Authors:  Emily P Zeitler; Sana M Al-Khatib; Daniel J Friedman; Joo Yoon Han; Jeanne E Poole; Gust H Bardy; J Thomas Bigger; Alfred E Buxton; Arthur J Moss; Kerry L Lee; Paul Dorian; Riccardo Cappato; Alan H Kadish; Peter J Kudenchuk; Daniel B Mark; Lurdes Y T Inoue; Gillian D Sanders
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2017-08-23

4.  Outcomes of patients with heart failure after primary prevention ICD unit generator replacement.

Authors:  Khang-Li Looi; Andrew Gavin; Lisa Cooper; Liane Dawson; Debbie Slipper; Nigel Lever
Journal:  Heart Asia       Date:  2019-02-28

5.  Incidence of defibrillator shocks after elective generator exchange following uneventful first battery life.

Authors:  Faisal M Merchant; Paul Jones; Scott Wehrenberg; Michael S Lloyd; Leslie A Saxon
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2014-11-10       Impact factor: 5.501

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.