| Literature DB >> 35835888 |
Milena Leo1, Alexander J Sharp2, Andre Briosa E Gala1, Michael T B Pope1, Timothy R Betts1.
Abstract
The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is a proven treatment for preventing sudden cardiac death. Transvenous leads are associated with significant mortality and morbidity, and the subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) addresses this. However, it is not without limitations, in particular the absence of anti-tachycardia pacing. The decision of which device is most suitable for an individual patient is often complex. Here, we review the relative merits and weaknesses of both the transvenous and S-ICD. We summarise the available evidence for each device in particular patient cohorts, namely: ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, idiopathic ventricular fibrillation, Brugada syndrome, long QT syndrome, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.Entities:
Keywords: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; Subcutaneous ICD; Sudden cardiac death; Transvenous ICD; Ventricular arrhythmias
Year: 2022 PMID: 35835888 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-022-01299-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol ISSN: 1383-875X Impact factor: 1.759