Literature DB >> 23677314

Association of single- vs dual-chamber ICDs with mortality, readmissions, and complications among patients receiving an ICD for primary prevention.

Pamela N Peterson1, Paul D Varosy, Paul A Heidenreich, Yongfei Wang, Thomas A Dewland, Jeptha P Curtis, Alan S Go, Robert T Greenlee, David J Magid, Sharon-Lise T Normand, Frederick A Masoudi.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Randomized trials of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention predominantly used single-chamber devices. In clinical practice, patients often receive dual-chamber ICDs, even without clear indications for pacing. The outcomes of dual- vs single-chamber devices are uncertain.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of single- and dual-chamber ICDs for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of admissions in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's (NCDR) ICD registry from 2006-2009 that could be linked to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services fee-for-service Medicare claims data. Patients were included if they received an ICD for primary prevention and did not have a documented indication for pacing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Adjusted risks of 1-year mortality, all-cause readmission, heart failure readmission, and device-related complications within 90 days were estimated with propensity-score matching based on patient, clinician, and hospital factors.
RESULTS: Among 32,034 patients, 12,246 (38%) received a single-chamber device and 19,788 (62%) received a dual-chamber device. In a propensity-matched cohort, rates of complications were lower for single-chamber devices (3.51% vs 4.72%; P < .001; risk difference, -1.20 [95% CI, -1.72 to -0.69]), but device type was not significantly associated with 1-year mortality (unadjusted rate, 9.85% vs 9.77%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.07]; P = .79), 1-year all-cause hospitalization (unadjusted rate, 43.86% vs 44.83%; HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.97-1.04]; P = .82), or hospitalization for heart failure (unadjusted rate, 14.73% vs 15.38%; HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.99-1.12]; P = .19). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients receiving an ICD for primary prevention without indications for pacing, the use of a dual-chamber device compared with a single-chamber device was associated with a higher risk of device-related complications and similar 1-year mortality and hospitalization outcomes. Reasons for preferentially using dual-chamber ICDs in this setting remains unclear.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23677314      PMCID: PMC3752924          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.4982

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  25 in total

Review 1.  Review of the registry's fourth year, incorporating lead data and pediatric ICD procedures, and use as a national performance measure.

Authors:  Stephen C Hammill; Mark S Kremers; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Paul A Heidenreich; Christine M Lang; Jeptha P Curtis; Yongfei Wang; Charles I Berul; Alan H Kadish; Sana M Al-Khatib; Ileana L Pina; Mary Norine Walsh; Michael J Mirro; Bruce D Lindsay; Matthew R Reynolds; Kathryn Pontzer; Laura Blum; Frederick Masoudi; John Rumsfeld; Ralph G Brindis
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2010-07-18       Impact factor: 6.343

2.  Is dual-chamber programming inferior to single-chamber programming in an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator? Results of the INTRINSIC RV (Inhibition of Unnecessary RV Pacing With AVSH in ICDs) study.

Authors:  Brian Olshansky; John D Day; Stephen Moore; Lawrence Gering; Murray Rosenbaum; Maureen McGuire; Scott Brown; Darin R Lerew
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-12-18       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Review of the registry's first year, data collected, and future plans.

Authors:  Stephen C Hammill; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Alan H Kadish; Mark S Kremers; Paul Heidenreich; Bruce D Lindsay; Michael J Mirro; Martha J Radford; Yongfei Wang; Christine M Lang; Joel C Harder; Ralph G Brindis
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 6.343

4.  The DAVID (Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator) II trial.

Authors:  Bruce L Wilkoff; Peter J Kudenchuk; Alfred E Buxton; Arjun Sharma; James R Cook; Anil K Bhandari; Michael Biehl; Gery Tomassoni; Anna Leonen; Linette R Klevan; Alfred P Hallstrom
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for Device-Based Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices): developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery and Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

Authors:  Andrew E Epstein; John P DiMarco; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; N A Mark Estes; Roger A Freedman; Leonard S Gettes; A Marc Gillinov; Gabriel Gregoratos; Stephen C Hammill; David L Hayes; Mark A Hlatky; L Kristin Newby; Richard L Page; Mark H Schoenfeld; Michael J Silka; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Michael O Sweeney; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; Christopher E Buller; Mark A Creager; Steven M Ettinger; David P Faxon; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon A Hunt; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Bruce W Lytle; Rick A Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel; Lynn G Tarkington; Clyde W Yancy
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-05-15       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Cost-effectiveness of defibrillator therapy or amiodarone in chronic stable heart failure: results from the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT).

Authors:  Daniel B Mark; Charlotte L Nelson; Kevin J Anstrom; Sana M Al-Khatib; Anastasios A Tsiatis; Patricia A Cowper; Nancy E Clapp-Channing; Linda Davidson-Ray; Jeanne E Poole; George Johnson; Jill Anderson; Kerry L Lee; Gust H Bardy
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-07-03       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Authors:  Gillian D Sanders; Mark A Hlatky; Douglas K Owens
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-10-06       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  The frequency and incremental cost of major complications among medicare beneficiaries receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Authors:  Matthew R Reynolds; David J Cohen; Aaron D Kugelmass; Phillip P Brown; Edmund R Becker; Steven D Culler; April W Simon
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2006-05-30       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Dual-chamber defibrillators reduce clinically significant adverse events compared with single-chamber devices: results from the DATAS (Dual chamber and Atrial Tachyarrhythmias Adverse events Study) trial.

Authors:  Jesus Almendral; Fernando Arribas; Christian Wolpert; Renato Ricci; Pedro Adragao; Erik Cobo; Xavier Navarro; Aurelio Quesada
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2008-04-07       Impact factor: 5.214

10.  Patient and implanting physician factors associated with mortality and complications after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation, 2002-2005.

Authors:  Sana M Al-Khatib; Melissa A Greiner; Eric D Peterson; Adrian F Hernandez; Kevin A Schulman; Lesley H Curtis
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2008-10
View more
  27 in total

1.  Geriatric Conditions in Patients Undergoing Defibrillator Implantation for Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: Prevalence and Impact on Mortality.

Authors:  Ariel R Green; Bruce Leff; Yongfei Wang; Erica S Spatz; Frederick A Masoudi; Pamela N Peterson; Stacie L Daugherty; Daniel D Matlock
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2015-12-29

2.  Device therapy: increased number of complications with dual-chamber ICDs.

Authors:  Megan Cully
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 32.419

3.  Working situation of cancer survivors versus the general population.

Authors:  Myung Kyung Lee; Young Ho Yun
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 4.442

Review 4.  Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Emelia J Benjamin; Michael J Blaha; Stephanie E Chiuve; Mary Cushman; Sandeep R Das; Rajat Deo; Sarah D de Ferranti; James Floyd; Myriam Fornage; Cathleen Gillespie; Carmen R Isasi; Monik C Jiménez; Lori Chaffin Jordan; Suzanne E Judd; Daniel Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda Lisabeth; Simin Liu; Chris T Longenecker; Rachel H Mackey; Kunihiro Matsushita; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Khurram Nasir; Robert W Neumar; Latha Palaniappan; Dilip K Pandey; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Mathew J Reeves; Matthew Ritchey; Carlos J Rodriguez; Gregory A Roth; Wayne D Rosamond; Comilla Sasson; Amytis Towfighi; Connie W Tsao; Melanie B Turner; Salim S Virani; Jenifer H Voeks; Joshua Z Willey; John T Wilkins; Jason Hy Wu; Heather M Alger; Sally S Wong; Paul Muntner
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2017-01-25       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 5.  Are dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillators really better than single-chamber ones? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Bing-Wei Chen; Qing Liu; Xu Wang; Ai-Min Dang
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2014-02-16       Impact factor: 1.900

6.  The Dx-AF study: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing VDD-ICD to VVI-ICD in detecting sub-clinical atrial fibrillation in defibrillator patients.

Authors:  Mohammed Shurrab; Amir Janmohamed; Jean-François Sarrazin; Felix Ayala-Paredes; Marcio Sturmer; Randall Williams; Satish Toal; Chris Lane; Kevin E Thorpe; Jeff S Healey; Eugene Crystal
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 1.900

7.  Single vs. dual chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillators or programming of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients without a bradycardia pacing indication: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Emily P Zeitler; Gillian D Sanders; Kavisha Singh; Ruth Ann Greenfield; Anne M Gillis; Bruce L Wilkoff; Jonathan P Piccini; Sana M Al-Khatib
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 5.214

Review 8.  "Two for the Price of One": A Single-Lead Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator System with a Floating Atrial Dipole.

Authors:  Nicole E Worden; Musab Alqasrawi; Siva M Krothapalli; Alexander Mazur
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2016-04-30

9.  Can machine learning complement traditional medical device surveillance? A case study of dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Authors:  Joseph S Ross; Jonathan Bates; Craig S Parzynski; Joseph G Akar; Jeptha P Curtis; Nihar R Desai; James V Freeman; Ginger M Gamble; Richard Kuntz; Shu-Xia Li; Danica Marinac-Dabic; Frederick A Masoudi; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Isuru Ranasinghe; Richard E Shaw; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2017-08-16

Review 10.  Adverse events following implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Rebecca Persson; Amy Earley; Ann C Garlitski; Ethan M Balk; Katrin Uhlig
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 1.900

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.