Key result
Primary prevention ICD/CRT-D linked to lower all-cause death vs no therapy in Japan's predominantly non-ischemic cohort.
Why the study?
Recent concerns exist regarding primary prevention ICD/CRT-D implantation in non-ischemic systolic heart failure under advanced GDMT, alongside low device utilization in Japan.
Does primary prevention ICD/CRT-D therapy reduce all-cause death and sudden cardiac death in patients with systolic heart failure?
Does primary prevention ICD/CRT-D therapy reduce all-cause death and sudden cardiac death in patients with systolic heart failure?
Primary prevention ICD/CRT-D therapy remains effective in reducing all-cause death in patients with systolic heart failure, including non-ischemic etiology, highlighting the need for increased utilization in Japan.
Prompts region-specific ICD benefit assessment in non-ischemic HF; leaves open primary prevention value amid advanced GDMT.
Among recipients of implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs) or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillators (CRT‐Ds), non‐ischemic etiology is predominant, accounting for more than 60% of cases in Japan, which is higher than that in the United States and other European countries. Despite recent concerns about primary prevention ICD/CRT‐D implantation for non‐ischemic patients with systolic heart failure in advanced guideline‐directed medical therapy (GDMT), ICD/CRT‐D therapy is likely effective in reducing the slope of the relationship between all‐cause death and sudden cardiac death. Two cohort studies in Japan have shown that the cumulative incidence of appropriate ICD/CRT‐D therapy is higher among non‐ischemic patients than ischemic patients receiving primary prevention ICD/CRT‐D implantation. Additionally, recent published cohort studies in the United States, Europe, and Japan reported a significant decrease in the risk of all‐cause death in primary prevention ICD/CRT‐D recipients compared to those without ICD/CRT‐D therapy. Notably, ICD/CRT‐D utilization in Japan is the lowest among the Group of Seven (G7) countries. Governmental acknowledgment of the value of primary prevention ICD/CRT‐D therapy, as well as educational activities for non‐cardiac electrophysiologists, are required to prevent a potential labor shortage and an excess of healthcare costs following out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yokoshiki et al. (2026) conducted a review in Primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (ICDs) / Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Defibrillators (CRT-Ds) vs. No ICD/CRT-D therapy was evaluated on All-cause death and sudden cardiac death. Non-ischemic etiology accounts for >60% of primary prevention ICD/CRT-D cases in Japan, where device therapy significantly decreases the risk of all-cause death compared to no therapy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: