The mortality analysis of primary prevention patients receiving a cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (CRT-D) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) according to guideline indications in the improve SCA study
- Authors
- Ching, Chi Keong; Hsieh, Yu-Cheng; Liu, Yen-Bing; Rodriguez, Diego A.; Kim, Young-Hoon; Joung, Boyoung; Singh, Balbir; Huang, Dejia; Hussin, Azlan; Chasnoits, Alexandr R.; O'Brien, Janet E.; Cerkvenik, Jeffrey; Lexcen, Daniel; Van Dorn, Brian; Zhang, Shu
- Issue Date
- Aug-2021
- Publisher
- Blackwell Publishing Inc.
- Keywords
- cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator; guideline adherence; implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; mortality; primary prevention; sudden cardiac death
- Citation
- Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, v.32, no.8, pp 2285 - 2294
- Pages
- 10
- Indexed
- SCIE
SCOPUS
- Journal Title
- Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
- Volume
- 32
- Number
- 8
- Start Page
- 2285
- End Page
- 2294
- URI
- https://scholarworks.korea.ac.kr/kumedicine/handle/2020.sw.kumedicine/55330
- DOI
- 10.1111/jce.15149
- ISSN
- 1045-3873
1540-8167
- Abstract
- Background
In primary prevention (PP) patients the utilization of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (CRT-D) remains low in many geographies, despite the proven mortality benefit.
Purpose
The objective of this analysis was to examine the mortality benefit in PP patients by guideline-indicated device type: ICD and CRT-D.
Methods
Improve sudden cardiac arrest was a prospective, nonrandomized, nonblinded multicenter trial that enrolled patients from regions where ICD utilization is low. PP patient's CRT-D or ICD eligibility was based upon the 2008 ACC/AHA/HRS and 2006 ESC guidelines. Mortality was assessed according to guideline-indicated device type comparing implanted and nonimplanted patients. Cox proportional hazards methods were used, adjusting for known factors affecting mortality risk.
Results
Among 2618 PP patients followed for a mean of 20.8 ± 10.8 months, 1073 were indicated for a CRT-D, and 1545 were indicated for an ICD. PP CRT-D-indicated patients who received CRT-D therapy had a 58% risk reduction in mortality compared with those without implant (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28–0.61, p < .0001). PP patients with an ICD indication had a 43% risk reduction in mortality with an ICD implant compared with no implant (adjusted HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41–0.81, p = .002).
Conclusions
This analysis confirms the mortality benefit of adherence to guideline-indicated implantable defibrillation therapy for PP patients in geographies where ICD therapy was underutilized. These results affirm that medical practice should follow clinical guidelines when choosing therapy for PP patients who meet the respective defibrillator device implant indication.
- Files in This Item
- There are no files associated with this item.
- Appears in
Collections - 2. Clinical Science > Department of Cardiology > 1. Journal Articles
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.