AIMS: In elderly patients, obscurity remains regarding the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) treatment as primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. This study assesses implant rates, therapy, adverse events, and survival gain in the elderly primary prevention ICD patient. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1395 patients treated with an ICD for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death at the Leiden University Medical Center were included and allocated to three groups according to age. Endpoints consisted of appropriate shocks and survival gain, defined as the time following first appropriate ICD shock to death. Mean follow-up was 2.9 ± 2.1 years. Fifty-one per cent of the patients were <65 years, 35% were 65-74 years, and 14% were ≥75 years. Prior to the year 2000, no ICDs were implanted in patients ≥75 years; 29% of the ICDs were implanted in patients 65-74 years. After 2005, 53% of the ICD recipients were ≥65 years at the time of implant, including 16% aged ≥75 years (P = 0.03). Five-year cumulative incidence of appropriate shocks was 19% for patients <65 years, 23% for patients 65-74 years, and 13% for patients ≥75 years (P = 0.47). At 1-year following appropriate shock, cumulative incidence for death was 35% for patients ≥75 years as compared with 7% for patients <65 years (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In routine clinical practice, the percentage of patients ≥75 years receiving an ICD for primary prevention is increasing. Despite experiencing comparable rates of appropriate ICD shocks, life prolongation by ICD is significantly less in elderly as compared to younger patients.
AIMS: In elderly patients, obscurity remains regarding the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) treatment as primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. This study assesses implant rates, therapy, adverse events, and survival gain in the elderly primary prevention ICD patient. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1395 patients treated with an ICD for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death at the Leiden University Medical Center were included and allocated to three groups according to age. Endpoints consisted of appropriate shocks and survival gain, defined as the time following first appropriate ICD shock to death. Mean follow-up was 2.9 ± 2.1 years. Fifty-one per cent of the patients were <65 years, 35% were 65-74 years, and 14% were ≥75 years. Prior to the year 2000, no ICDs were implanted in patients ≥75 years; 29% of the ICDs were implanted in patients 65-74 years. After 2005, 53% of the ICD recipients were ≥65 years at the time of implant, including 16% aged ≥75 years (P = 0.03). Five-year cumulative incidence of appropriate shocks was 19% for patients <65 years, 23% for patients 65-74 years, and 13% for patients ≥75 years (P = 0.47). At 1-year following appropriate shock, cumulative incidence for death was 35% for patients ≥75 years as compared with 7% for patients <65 years (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In routine clinical practice, the percentage of patients ≥75 years receiving an ICD for primary prevention is increasing. Despite experiencing comparable rates of appropriate ICD shocks, life prolongation by ICD is significantly less in elderly as compared to younger patients.
Authors: Daniel B Kramer; Daniel D Matlock; Alfred E Buxton; Nathan E Goldstein; Carol Goodwin; Ariel R Green; James N Kirkpatrick; Christopher Knoepke; Rachel Lampert; Paul S Mueller; Matthew R Reynolds; John A Spertus; Lynne W Stevenson; Susan L Mitchell Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2015-06-02
Authors: Cornelia Scheurlen; Jan van den Bruck; Jonas Wörmann; Tobias Plenge; Arian Sultan; Daniel Steven; Jakob Lüker Journal: Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol Date: 2021-01-29