Literature DB >> 26969818

Estimating the Risks and Benefits of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Generator Replacement: A Systematic Review.

Krystina B Lewis1,2, Dawn Stacey1,3, Sandra L Carroll4, Laura Boland5, Lindsey Sikora6, David Birnie2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Every 4-7 years an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) pulse generator must be replaced surgically. This procedure is not without risk. In some cases, the risk versus benefit ratio may be against replacement. We aimed to synthesize the evidence on risks, benefits, and costs related to ICD replacement.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using electronic databases from 2000 onward. Literature screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction were independently conducted by two reviewers. Outcomes included major and minor complications, ICD therapies, and costs, which were synthesized descriptively.
RESULTS: Of 1,483 citations, 17 nonrandomized studies met criteria. Median rate of major complications was 4.05% (range 0.55-7.37%) and minor complications was 3.50% (range 0.36-7.37%). Without non-ICD control groups, the true risk reduction provided by the ICD following replacement is unknown. Following ICD replacement, annualized rate of appropriate ICD therapy was 10.52% (range 2.42-75.00%). Of these, patients without therapies during their first generator life and those no longer meeting ICD criteria received appropriate therapies at nontrivial rates.
CONCLUSION: Rates of complications associated with ICD replacement are substantial. No study had nonreplacement groups, hence the true risk reduction provided by the ICD following replacement is unknown. Our analysis did not identify a subgroup at low risk of therapies following replacement. Shared discussions should occur with patients about the evidence, healthcare goals, risk tolerances, and feelings about life and death trade-offs to enable high-quality decisions about ICD replacement. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  benefit; complication; cost; implantable cardioverter defibrillator; systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26969818     DOI: 10.1111/pace.12850

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  5 in total

1.  "Real life" longevity of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices.

Authors:  Antonis S Manolis; Themistoklis Maounis; Spyridon Koulouris; Vassilios Vassilikos
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 2.882

2.  Premature battery depletion with St. Jude Medical ICD and CRT-D devices. Indian Heart Rhythm Society guidelines for physicians.

Authors:  Kartikeya Bhargava; Vanita Arora; Aparna Jaswal; Amit Vora
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2016-12-08

Review 3.  ENDURALIFE-Powered Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy Defibrillator Devices for Treating Heart Failure: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance.

Authors:  James Michael Evans; Andrew Cleves; Helen Morgan; Liesl Millar; Grace Carolan-Rees
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.561

4.  Perspectives in managing recalls of cardiac implantable electronic devices.

Authors:  Niraj Varma
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2016-12-14

5.  Co-construction of health technology assessment recommendations with patients: An example with cardiac defibrillator replacement.

Authors:  Marie-Pascale Pomey; Philippe Brouillard; Isabelle Ganache; Laurie Lambert; Lucy Boothroyd; Caroline Collette; Sylvain Bédard; Alexandre Grégoire; Sandra Pelaez; Olivier Demers-Payette; Mireille Goetghebeur; Michèle de Guise; Denis Roy
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 3.377

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.