implanted the first implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in a young female with recurrent ventricular fibrillation and provided an innovative approach to aborted sudden cardiac death (SCD). Although the ICD was considered a treatment of last resort during that incipient stage, subsequent years have witnessed prolific expansion of indications for ICD implantation. 2 Several large-scale clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy for both primary and secondary prevention of SCD in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy. 3,4 ICD therapy in such high-risk patients has been shown to improve survival compared with conventional antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone. 3,4 The number of ICD implantations has increased significantly in the last decade, with a concurrent decrease in the use of stand-alone antiarrhythmic drugs for ventricular indications. [5] ][7] Current ICDs have sophisticated programming capabilities, atrial and bipolar leads, and are able to deliver antitachycardia pacing algorithms (ATP) in addition to defibrillating shocks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patel et al. (2009) conducted a review in Sudden cardiac death and recurrent ventricular fibrillation. Catheter Ablation / Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) vs. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy was evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: