| Literature DB >> 28431077 |
Kristina H Haugaa1,2, Roland Tilz3, Serge Boveda4, Dan Dobreanu5, Elena Sciaraffia6, Jacques Mansourati7, Giorgi Papiashvili8, Nikolaos Dagres9.
Abstract
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is the standard of care for prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in high-risk patients. For primary prevention of SCD, in patients with ischaemic heart disease, there is more robust data on the effect of ICD therapy compared with patients with non-ischaemic heart disease, but current real-life practice may differ substantially. The aim of this European Heart Rhythm Association survey was to evaluate the clinical practice regarding implantation of ICD for primary prevention among European countries in patients with non-ischaemic and ischaemic heart disease. Furthermore, we wanted to investigate the impact of the results of the recently published DANISH trial on clinical practice among European countries. In total, 48 centres from 17 different countries responded to the questionnaire. The majority did not implant ICD for primary prevention on a regular basis in patients with non-ischaemic heart disease despite current guidelines. Also, centres have changed their indications after the recent report on the efficacy of ICD in these patients. In patients with ischaemic heart disease, the guidelines for primary prevention ICD were followed on a regular basis, and no relevant change in indications were reported. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization therapy; EHRA survey; EP wire; Heart failure; Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; Ischemic cardiomyopathy; Ischemic heart disease; Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy; Pacing; Prevention; Sudden cardiac death; Ventricular arrhythmias
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28431077 DOI: 10.1093/europace/eux089
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Europace ISSN: 1099-5129 Impact factor: 5.214