Tarek Ajam1,2, Vikas Kalra1,2, Changyu Shen3, Xiaochen Li3, Sandeep Gautam4, Thomas Kambur1,2, Mamta Barmeda5, Kyle W Yancey6, Samer Ajam1,2, Jason Garlie1,2, John M Miller1,2, Rahul Jain1,2. 1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Richard L Roudebush Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN. 2. Division of Cardiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN. 3. Department of Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN. 4. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO. 5. Indiana University School of Allied Health Sciences, Indianapolis, IN. 6. Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The median age of patients in major Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)trials (MUSTT, MADIT-I, MADIT-II, and SCD-HeFT) was 63-67 years; with only 11% ≥70 years. There is little follow-up data on patients over 70 years of age who received an ICD for primary/secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death, particularly for veterans. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study the natural history of ICD implantation for veterans over 70 years of age. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed single center ICD data in 216 patients with a mean age at implantation 76 ± 4 years. The ICD indication was primary prevention in 161 patients and secondary prevention in 55 patients. The ICD indication was unavailable in 4 patients. RESULTS: Mean duration of follow up was 1686 ± 1244 days during which 114 (52%) patients died. Of these, 31% died without receiving any appropriate ICD therapy. Overall, 60/216 (28%) received appropriate therapy and 28/216 (13%) received inappropriate therapy. Patients who had ICD implantation for secondary prophylaxis had statistically more (p= 0.02) appropriate therapies compared to patients who had ICD implantation for primary prevention. Indication for implantation and hypertension predicted appropriate therapy, while age at the time of implantation and presence of atrial fibrillation predicted inappropriate therapies. Overall, 7.7% had device related complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although 28% septuagenarians in this study received appropriate ICD therapy, they had high rates of mortality, inappropriate therapy, and device complications. ICD implantation in the elderly merits individualized consideration, with higher benefit for secondary prevention.
BACKGROUND: The median age of patients in major Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)trials (MUSTT, MADIT-I, MADIT-II, and SCD-HeFT) was 63-67 years; with only 11% ≥70 years. There is little follow-up data on patients over 70 years of age who received an ICD for primary/secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death, particularly for veterans. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study the natural history of ICD implantation for veterans over 70 years of age. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed single center ICD data in 216 patients with a mean age at implantation 76 ± 4 years. The ICD indication was primary prevention in 161 patients and secondary prevention in 55 patients. The ICD indication was unavailable in 4 patients. RESULTS: Mean duration of follow up was 1686 ± 1244 days during which 114 (52%) patients died. Of these, 31% died without receiving any appropriate ICD therapy. Overall, 60/216 (28%) received appropriate therapy and 28/216 (13%) received inappropriate therapy. Patients who had ICD implantation for secondary prophylaxis had statistically more (p= 0.02) appropriate therapies compared to patients who had ICD implantation for primary prevention. Indication for implantation and hypertension predicted appropriate therapy, while age at the time of implantation and presence of atrial fibrillation predicted inappropriate therapies. Overall, 7.7% had device related complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although 28% septuagenarians in this study received appropriate ICD therapy, they had high rates of mortality, inappropriate therapy, and device complications. ICD implantation in the elderly merits individualized consideration, with higher benefit for secondary prevention.
Authors: Ilan Goldenberg; Anant K Vyas; W Jackson Hall; Arthur J Moss; Hongyue Wang; Hua He; Wojciech Zareba; Scott McNitt; Mark L Andrews Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Helmut Klein; David J Wilber; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; Steven L Higgins; Mary W Brown; Mark L Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gust H Bardy; Kerry L Lee; Daniel B Mark; Jeanne E Poole; Douglas L Packer; Robin Boineau; Michael Domanski; Charles Troutman; Jill Anderson; George Johnson; Steven E McNulty; Nancy Clapp-Channing; Linda D Davidson-Ray; Elizabeth S Fraulo; Daniel P Fishbein; Richard M Luceri; John H Ip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: K MacIntyre; S Capewell; S Stewart; J W Chalmers; J Boyd; A Finlayson; A Redpath; J P Pell; J J McMurray Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-09-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Douglas S Lee; Jack V Tu; Peter C Austin; Paul Dorian; Raymond Yee; Alice Chong; David A Alter; Andreas Laupacis Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-06-11 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alfred E Buxton; Kerry L Lee; Gail E Hafley; Luis A Pires; John D Fisher; Michael R Gold; Mark E Josephson; Michael H Lehmann; Eric N Prystowsky Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 24.094