PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 13, 2006Circulation221 citations

Causes and Consequences of Heart Failure After Prophylactic Implantation of a Defibrillator in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II

View Full Paper
IGIlan GoldenbergAMArthur J. MossWHWilliam J. Hall

Key Result

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy was associated with an increased risk for first (HR 1.39, P=0.02) and recurrent (HR 1.58, P<0.001) heart failure events vs conventional therapy.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=1,218)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy increase the risk of heart failure in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease?

P
Population
1218 patients with chronic ischemic heart disease enrolled in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II
I
Intervention
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy (single-chamber or dual-chamber)
C
Comparator
Conventional therapy
O
Outcome
First and recurrent heart failure (HF) eventshard clinical

Prophylactic ICD therapy in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease improves survival but significantly increases the risk of subsequent heart failure events, suggesting a transformation of sudden death risk to heart failure risk.

Main Result

Effect estimate: HR 1.39

p-value: p=0.02

Abstract

Background— Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy may be associated with an increased risk for heart failure (HF). The present study evaluated the frequency, causes, and consequences of HF after ICD implantation. Methods and Results— We performed a retrospective analysis of the clinical factors and outcomes associated with postenrollment HF events in 1218 patients enrolled in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of ICD:conventional therapy for first and recurrent HF events were 1.39 ( P =0.02) and 1.58 ( P <0.001), respectively. The risk was increased among patients who received single-chamber or dual-chamber ICDs. Development of HF was associated with an increased mortality risk (HR, 3.80; P <0.001). Among patients who received a single-chamber ICD, there was a similar survival benefit before and after the development of HF (HR, 0.59 and 0.61, respectively; P =0.92 for difference), whereas among patients with dual-chamber devices, there was a significant reduction in survival benefit after HF (HR, 0.26 and 0.83, respectively; P =0.01 for difference). Within the defibrillator arm of the trial, patients who received life-prolonging therapy from the ICD had an increased risk for first and recurrent HF events (HR, 1.90; P =0.01 and 1.74; P <0.001, respectively). Conclusions— Patients with chronic ischemic heart disease who are treated with either single-chamber or dual-chamber ICDs have improved survival but an increased risk of HF. The present data suggest that ICD therapy transforms sudden death risk to a subsequent HF risk. These findings should direct more attention to the prevention of HF in patients who receive an ICD.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Goldenberg et al. (2006) conducted a cohort in chronic ischemic heart disease (n=1,218). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy vs. conventional therapy was evaluated on first heart failure events (HR 1.39, p=0.02). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy was associated with an increased risk for first (HR 1.39, P=0.02) and recurrent (HR 1.58, P<0.001) heart failure events vs conventional therapy.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0aaf6b7e716524c8ac9526https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.577262
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper