Key result
Extravascular ICDs achieve ~99% successful defibrillation at implantation, surpassing performance goals.
Why the study?
Does an extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator safely and effectively terminate induced ventricular arrhythmias in patients with an indication for an ICD?
Does an extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator safely and effectively terminate induced ventricular arrhythmias in patients with an indication for an ICD?
p-value: p=<0.001
The extravascular ICD system can be safely implanted and effectively detects and terminates ventricular arrhythmias, offering a viable alternative to transvenous and subcutaneous ICDs.
Supports extravascular ICD evaluation in indicated patients; leaves open comparative outcomes versus transvenous systems.
In this prospective global study, we found that extravascular ICDs were implanted safely and were able to detect and terminate induced ventricular arrhythmias at the time of implantation. (Funded by Medtronic; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04060680.).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Friedman et al. (2022) studied Cardiac arrhythmias requiring ICD implantation (n=356). Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator vs. null was evaluated on Successful defibrillation at implantation (95% CI 96.6-100.0, p=<0.001). Extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillators achieved a successful defibrillation rate of 98.7% at implantation, surpassing the performance goal of 88%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: