Why the study?
Does a dual-chamber ICD compared to a single-chamber ICD affect the rate of inappropriate shocks in patients with ischaemic heart disease receiving an ICD for primary prevention?
Does a dual-chamber ICD compared to a single-chamber ICD affect the rate of inappropriate shocks in patients with ischaemic heart disease receiving an ICD for primary prevention?
Real-world data from Denmark shows lower overall ICD shock rates than randomized trials, but highlights an increased risk of inappropriate shocks with dual-chamber versus single-chamber devices in primary prevention.
May support single-chamber ICD preference to reduce inappropriate shocks in primary prevention; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
In this nationwide study of IHD patients with an ICD for primary prevention of SCD, the incidence of appropriate shocks as well as inappropriate shocks were significantly lower than reported in randomized trials. Implantation of a dual-chamber ICD was associated with more inappropriate shocks compared with single chamber devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Weeke et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: