Key result
Review outlines available ICD options to guide optimal device selection for preventing SCD.
Why the study?
With multiple ICD options now available to protect against sudden cardiac death, guidance is needed on determining the optimal device for specific patient populations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review provides guidance on selecting the optimal type of commercially available ICD for specific patient populations to protect against sudden cardiac death.
The first viable alternative to surgical implantation of an epicardial defibrillator system for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) was a single chamber transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Thanks to technological advancements over the past 40 years, electrophysiologists now have several options when determining the optimal type of ICD to provide protection against SCD, including the number of leads implanted, whether a patient meets indications for cardiac resynchronization, and if the patient would benefit from an extravascular device. In this review, we will detail the breadth of options for commercially available ICD therapy to provide guidance on which device is best suited for specific patient populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peigh et al. (2025) conducted a review in Sudden cardiac death (SCD) prevention. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) was evaluated. This review details the breadth of commercially available implantable cardioverter defibrillator options to guide optimal device selection for the prevention of sudden cardiac death.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: