PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 15, 1996Circulation148 citations

Incidence and Clinical Significance of Multiple Consecutive, Appropriate, High-Energy Discharges in Patients With Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillators

View Full Paper
JPJulián Pérez‐VillacastínJAJesús AlmendralÁAÁngel Arenal

Key Points

  • The aim is to assess the incidence and prognostic significance of multiple consecutive high-energy discharges in patients with implanted cardioverter-defibrillators.
  • Followed 80 consecutive patients with an ICD for up to 82 months.

Structured PICO

Does the occurrence of multiple consecutive, appropriate, high-energy discharges (MCDs) predict mortality in patients with an ICD?

P
Population
80 consecutive patients with an automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), including 38 who survived out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and 42 with recurrent ventricular tachycardia.
I
Intervention
Multiple appropriate, consecutive, high-energy discharges (MCDs) during follow-up
C
Comparator
Single appropriate discharges or no appropriate discharges
O
Outcome
Mortality (total, cardiac, and arrhythmic) and composite of death or heart transplanthard clinical

In patients with an ICD, experiencing multiple consecutive appropriate discharges is an independent predictor of cardiac and arrhythmic mortality, identifying a high-risk group that may require advanced therapies like heart transplantation.

Limitations

  • Small sample size (authors note findings need confirmation in larger studies)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Some patients with an automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) suffer multiple appropriate, consecutive, high-energy discharges (MCDs) during follow-up. Such events might represent resistant ventricular arrhythmias and might have prognostic significance. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighty consecutive patients with an ICD were followed up for up to 82 months (mean, 21 +/- 19 months). Thirty-eight patients had survived an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and 42 had recurrent ventricular tachycardia. During follow-up, 16 patients had MCD (group A), 26 patients had episodes of single appropriate discharges (group B), and 38 patients had no appropriate discharges (group C). Group A patients had worse functional status (P = .001), lower left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) (P = .001), and lower survival rates (log rank, P = .003) than the remaining two groups of patients. Cox analysis showed LVEF (P = .001) to be an independent predictor of MCD. Independent predictors of death or heart transplant were MCD (P = .001), female sex (P = .001), age (P = .001), history of cardiac arrest (P = .003), and functional status (P = .003). The only independent predictor of total mortality was female sex (P = .002). Independent predictors of cardiac death were MCD (P = .007) and female sex (P = .018). Independent predictors of arrhythmic death were age (P = .001), female sex (P = .02), and MCD (P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an ICD, the development of MCD is an independent predictor of cardiac and arrhythmic mortality. If this finding is confirmed in larger studies, it may help to identify patients in whom other therapeutic alternatives, ie, heart transplantation, should be considered during follow-up after ICD implantation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Pérez‐Villacastín et al. (1996) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0fd50fd8c5cf602efd3802https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.93.4.753
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper