Key result
Electrical storm in ICD patients does not independently confer increased mortality, with 80% of storm patients alive at 5 years and no significant survival difference compared to those without storm.
Why the study?
Does electrical storm independently confer increased mortality in patients with ICDs for sustained VT or VF?
Cohort (n=222)
Does electrical storm independently confer increased mortality in patients with ICDs for sustained VT or VF?
Electrical storm in ICD patients does not independently confer increased mortality at 5 years compared to those with isolated or no appropriate ICD therapy.
Electrical storm should not heighten mortality concern in ICD patients; challenges consensus of ominous prognosis and leaves open need for prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Electrical storm in patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is purported to carry an ominous prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively compared 40 patients with electrical storm (defined as three or more episodes of ventricular arrhythmia requiring ICD therapy in a 24 h period) with those only having isolated appropriate ICD therapy (n=57) and with patients having no or only inappropriate ICD therapy (n=125). All patients received ICDs for documented sustained VT or VF. There was no significant difference in age, sex, ejection fraction, total follow-up time, or underlying heart disease between any of the three groups. Patients who had electrical storm received their first appropriate ICD therapy 275 +/- 369 days post-implant (35% had storm as their first event) with storm occurring an average of 599 +/- 710 days post-implant. Patients had 1.5 +/- 1.0 storms in total (median= 1), with 55 +/- 91 episodes per storm. There were no significant differences in actuarial survival at 5-year follow-up between the three groups. Eighty percent of storm patients were alive 5 years post-implant. CONCLUSION: Storm is a common occurrence in ICD patients, can occur at any time during the follow-up period, and does not independently confer increased mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mary Greene (2000) conducted a cohort in Implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for sustained VT or VF (n=222). Electrical storm vs. Isolated appropriate ICD therapy or no/inappropriate ICD therapy was evaluated on Actuarial survival at 5-year follow-up. Electrical storm in ICD patients does not independently confer increased mortality, with 80% of storm patients alive at 5 years and no significant survival difference compared to those without storm.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: